Social Media presents a whole new way to develop relationships. Traditionally, a nonprofit organization engaged in person-to-person communication with its audience. This method of personal persuasion consisted of having a conversation with one or more prospective target members to encourage them to use the nonprofit’s offers, donate, volunteer, or to act on an idea. While still useful, this strategy is limiting. By using social media, a nonprofit organization can initially reach the public through its Web site and then expand by going to places online where people naturally congregate. Outside of its own Web site, the role of the organization is to support and guide dialogue on social networks. Successfully reaching supporters requires meeting them on their own playing field. Today, that means establishing a presence on outlets such as Facebook and Twitter, hubs of communication utilized by millions for the purpose of making social connections.
Even within the world of social media, the foundation of any relationship is listening. Before taking action, nonprofits must first listen to what people are talking about, what interests or concerns them, and how they view the organization. How do you listen over a technological device? By sifting through online conversations, making sense of data, and then using what is learned to influence those discussing the message. Active listening in terms of social media means being aware of what is happening with supporters and then using this information to explore further opportunities.
The next step in building relationships is engaging, which in the context of social media is interacting with people online. There are numerous ways to engage, including sharing information, entering or initiating conversation, showing appreciation to supporters, educating or raising awareness, and asking people to donate time, talent, or funds. Of course, in any public forum there will be critics contributing negative comments. In these situations, leadership should personally participate and engage with critics. An uncomfortable scenario can become an opportunity to potentially build a relationship.
The end goal of listening and engaging is to build relationships between an organization and its network. Concepts that are associated with building might include planning, structure, and organization. On the contrary, relaxing coordination efforts and allowing imperfection can have a successful return in power and creativity. The organization should always be intentional but also realize that individuals tend to follow their own unique path. People can tell when an organization is insincere, which is why having authentic motives is so imperative. Related to this is the idea of karma banking, described in the reading as giving to the world without expecting anything in immediate return. I agree that having a long-term perspective is necessary when trying to enact social change. Even if the prospect does not respond positively when first asking for a donation, you will have learned a great deal and can plan better for the next attempt. Continuing to show appreciation will have payback in the long run. It is a good point to remember that many people have the desire to be helpful and will be useful if given the chance. If you take the time to uncover barriers, target members might be moved to participate in other ways.
The ladder of engagement described in The Networked Nonprofit offered a great illustration of the diverse mix of supporters tapped into by an organization. Basically, it is a framework of participation where people can start anywhere and work their way up and down. This is another example of how an organization should not focus on control but rather work to provide opportunities for people to become more engaged. The different levels are defined by participant type and involvement:
· Happy bystanders: listen to information.
· Spreaders: share information about a cause with other people.
· Donors: contribute money to a cause.
· Evangelists: ask other people within their personal social networks to give time and money to a cause.
· Instigators: create their own content, activities, and events of behalf of a cause.
Strong relationships are built on trust through transparency. For nonprofit organizations, transparency is necessary for honest and open engagement and should become a way of thinking and being. According to The Networked Nonprofit there are three kinds of organizations:
· Fortress: focuses on self-protection and holds the outside world at bay by controlling communication that goes out and not allowing outside communication into the organization.
· Transactionals: provide services offered and selected by the public that are primarily based on cost. Target publics exist merely for financial support.
· Transparents: people from the outside are let in and staffers are let out, both being enriched in the process.
For an organization to be transparent, leadership must be straightforward when talking to various audiences. If values are easily seen and understood, employees can spend more time reinforcing the public view of the organization and helping people when appropriate. In addition to sharing good news, it is perfectly acceptable to acknowledge the bad. An interesting point made in the reading was that the more public an organization is, the easier it is to find it and the more opportunities it will have. This seems obvious but I believe it is a truth too easily overlooked. It is much easier to pursue an organization when it quickly pops up in a search engine and lists all information that could possibly be relevant to the viewer. The successful nonprofit organization is one that builds strong relationships founded on transparency with a large number of people. Social media is the perfect vehicle to accomplish this objective.
No comments:
Post a Comment