March 2011

Do Nonprofits Spam?

Supporters at the gatesNPTech maven Deborah Elizabeth Finn started a blog last week called "No Nonprofit Spam".  As a well-known NPTech consultant, Deborah is far from alone in finding herself regularly subscribed to nonprofit email lists that she has never opted into.  But, as opposed to just complaining about what is, in anyone's definition (except possibly the sender's) unsolicited commercial email; Deborah took the opportunity to try and educate.  It's a controversial undertaking. Nobody likes spam.  Many of us like nonprofits, and aren't going to hold them to the same level of criticism as we will that anonymous meds or mortgages dealer; and the measures that we take against the seamy spammers are pretty harsh.  Even if nonprofits are guilty of the spamming crime, should they be subject to the same punishments? 

Spam, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. So, for the purposes of this conversation, let's agree on a definition of nonprofit spam. Sending one email to someone that you have identified as a potential constituent, either by engaging them in other media or purchasing their name from a list provider, is, at worst, borderline spam, and not something that I would join a campaign to complain about.  If I delete the message and don't hear from the NPO again, no big deal.  But subscribing me to a recurring list without my express buy-in is what I consider spamming.  And that's the focus of Deborah's blog (which is naming names) and the action that goes from email engagement to email abuse, for the purposes of this post. 

In my post to the No Nonprofit Spam website, I made the point that we're all inundated with email and we can only support so many orgs, so NPOs would do better to build their web site and their Charity Navigator rating than to push their messages, uninvited, into our inboxes. It's a matter of being respectful of constituent priorities.

There are two motivations for overdoing it on the emails. One is the mildly understandable, but not really forgiveable mistake of overenthusiasm for one's mission.  Believing that the work you do is so important that subscribing people who have expressed no interest to your list is warranted.  That's a mistake of naivety more than anything else.

The less forgivable excuse is the typical spam calculation: no matter how many people you offend, enough people will click on it to justify the excess.  After all, it's cost-justified by the response rate, right?  

The downside in both cases is that, if you only count the constituents you gained, then you're missing something of great important to nonprofits and little import to viagra salesman.  The people you offended might have otherwise been supporters. The viagra spammer isn't going to pitch their product through other avenues.  It's a low investment, so any yeild is great gain.  But you likely have people devoting their full hearts to your cause.  You're in the business of building relationships, not burning them.  And you will never know how many consttuents that you might have gained through more respectful avenues if you treat them callously with your email initiatives.

Worse, the standard ways that individuals deal with spam could be very challenging for an NPO to deal with.  In the comments to my No Nonprofit Spam post, some people advocated doing more than just marking the messages as spam, but also reporting the offending orgs to Spamcop, who then list them with Spamhaus, the organization that maintains block lists of known spammers that large ISPs subscribe to.  By overstepping the bounds of net courtesy, you could not only alienate individuals, but wreak havoc with your ability to reach people by email at all.  My take is that reporting NPOs -- even the ones who, by my above definition, spam -- is unusually cruel to organizations who do good in the world.  But I'm a nonprofit professional. Many of the people that we might be offending aren't going to be so sympathetic.

So, what do you think? Is spam from a nonprofit any different from spam from a commercial vendor?  Should nonprofits be held to the same level of accountability as viagra spammers? Are even single unsolicited emails spam, or are they permissable? I searched for some nonprofit-focused best practices before completing this article, and didn't come up with anything that differentiated our industry from the commercial ones, but I think there's a difference. Just as nonprofits are exempt from the Do Not Call lists, I think we deserve some exemptions in email.  But I could be wrong, and what would serve us all well is a clear community policy on email engagement.  Does anyone have any to recommend?

Cartoon borrowed from Rob Cottingham's Noise To Signal collection.

11NTC reflections

11ntc(Picture from http://www.flickr.com/photos/josephcmoran/5535795940/) The hallway conversations, the parties, the amazing array of sessions and vendors...  And the inevitable depression that sets in after the return to the office.  Oh NTC, how do I love thee, let me count the ways!

1. Best attendees EVAR!
2. The hallway conversations are always terrific.
3. The energy and enthusiasm of a couple thousand people who already "get it" is (almost) enough to keep me energized for a year!
4. An astounding array of people and companies that exist to serve nonprofits.

So with all that love, there are some things that I don't love about the conference (this is my 4th) and I want to share some gentle criticism and I wonder if there are others who feel the same.

  1. Just too damn big. Maybe it's just me but it felt especially overwhelming this year.  I hate to say it, but it seemed "corporate."  Possible solution: limit the number of in-person tickets and exand the on-line portion of the conference.
  2. Session content just not techie enough.  There just isn't enough meat for the "intermediate to advanced" techies - it's geared towards intro folks.  Possible solution: have a "beginner" day and an "advanced" day, so people could skip things as desired.
  3. Sessions are wayyyy uneven.  Is there a way to vet content/speakers?  If I see another bulleted list in PowerPoint, I'll shoot somebody.  Seriously folks, it's 2011.   Having a picture next to a bulleted list does not improve your slide.  And PLEASE involve the audience - we WANT to interact many-to-many, not hear from the "sage on the stage."  And reading a twitter feed helps, but isn't the answer.  Possible solution: crowdsource the content review and session structure with some of the NTEN community.  There are folks who know how to do this and do it well.  Gunner from AsiprationTech?
  4. The food sucks.  I know this is likely not negotiable (i.e. you have to use the hotel's catering) but man, feeding a bunch of people at once always seems to lead to terrible, bland, cold food.  I've learned my lesson and always try to eat offsite for breakfast for sure, and lunch if I can get away (not always possible).  Possible solution: List of nearby decent restaurants so those who want to get away from the "conference carbs" can. 
  5. Duplicated sessions.  How many social media sessions do we really need?  Possible solution: more aggressive editing from the NTC Agenda Planning team.  

 

That's just a couple of thoughts about the conference.  And of course, in spite of the things I've mentioned, this conference is still THE place to be every year, and I SO appreciate all the hard work that the NTEN staff put in.  Thank you Holly and co, you guys are amazing and I love what you do for the community!  (And I met my wife here four years ago, so I really do mean it when I say I love what you do!)

Notes from SXSWi

South by Southwest is everything they say it is and probably a whole lot more. This being my first year, I was dutifully overwhelmed with the sheer number of options for learning, inspiration and fun. I had planned to report back on the nonprofit oriented sessions I attended and their take-aways, but something else has struck me as even more important to highlight.

I did go to some good sessions (and missed many more that sounded great) and was on a panel full of smart people “Money for Nothing and Your Software for Free”  audio (slides & resources) about free and open source software, led by Idealware Board president Jeff Herron and targeted at nonprofits. But what really resonated with me is how much more impact in person idea exchanges seems to have than finding the same information online.

Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely love to seek out and read great resources online, but the energy and excitement of finding a great new idea or validation of something I was already thinking just isn’t the same as when it is shared in a conversation. Or presented by a terrific passionate speaker. And as connective as social media is, there is just no comparison to debating email subject lines, Open Source or the best CRM over a beer. And the swell of activity around raising funds for Japan disaster relief created a unique tenor in the halls and rooms that is difficult to describe.

It got me thinking about the way we interact with supporters, donors and clients and I just wanted to make a pitch that while nonprofits are busy building their online presence, to appreciate the real world opportunities and keep in person events and workshops in the mix. And to enjoy all the opportunities a conference like this (or NTC going on now!) as to offer.

And now some session highlights. The links take you to the schedule pages where you can hear the audio for most of the sessions. Very cool, but not exactly like being there ;)

Let’s Hook Up: Brands, Celebs and Nonprofits”  which contained useful information and some great examples of how to find the right match for your organization.  Hint: They should know and actually care about your mission.

Why would we think Social Media is Revolutionary?”  with Clay Shirky was fantastic and thought provoking, and I particularly loved it when he said “And this is where I had it all wrong” and went on to explain the importance of long term efforts and laying the groundwork before activating your social network in a crisis mode.

"Apps, APIs & Syndication: Creativity in the Post-Website Era"  which was interesting but mostly aimed at for profit retailers. I think a session like this focused on the creative ways nonprofits are doing this is something I'd want to see.

"Anatomy of a Design Decision"  This was a great breakdown of the different types of design approaches and when to use each by Jared Spool.

The Keynote by Tom’s Shoes founder Blake Mycoskie had some of us in tears describing the evolution from idea to successful venture.

And the closing presentation by Bruce Sterling  sort of makes my point about the impact of real world interaction. Surprisingly political and passionate he had the audience’s full attention and the atmosphere in the room was intense.

When not in a session I spent time in the Beaconfire Lounge where nonprofit folks gathered to relax and network. Music and photography from local nonprofit organizations provided a wonderful atmosphere. I missed a LOT of sessions I really wanted to see including most of the big nonprofit ones because of life stuff getting in the way but I feel confident they will be well covered on the web.

Oh and the coolest thing about this years SXSWi? Old school, in person, hands on sketching on big pads that turned sessions into infographics – now posted on the web at Ogilvy Notes.  They are well worth checking out.
 

Research Gone Awry!

 I recently wrapped up my research project testing how well broadcast email tools successfully deliver messages. This study pitted five broadcast email tools against each other to see which one got caught in spam filters the most. I’ll save you the suspense: I don’t really know who won. Yet. I didn’t design the study to collect enough data to be valid, so I'm trying again.

One of the most interesting things that happened during the course of the study was that I became intimately familiar with using a whole variety of free email providers. When designing the orginial sample, we wanted to make sure we were representing all sorts of email clients. This meant some corporate clients, some institutional, and of course, some freebies. I’m sure you’re all familiar with Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail, and AOL. I wasn’t sure that four was quite enough, so I picked a fifth free provider: Mail.com. I’d never heard of it, but it sounded legitimate enough.
 
I "flipped the switch" and began the study. This essentially involved bombarding a set of email accounts with regular broadcast emails over the course of six weeks. I collected my data, logging the results diligently. I quickly noticed a problem with my data:
 

 
That got my attention.
 
 
Mail.com accounted for 70% of the failed deliveries. Most of those weren’t caught in the spam filter, either. They were mostly “black hole” emails; they failed to appear at all. I had a hard time believing this was typical for email deliverability in general, but this was part of my data. Clearly free email services aren’t created equal. The screwy results from this account combined with the small sample size led me to redesign the study.
 
The new email deliverability study is currently underway. The report will include our findings of which broadcast email tools get through to your constituents the most successfully. Look for it in April!

Out from Under Too Much Data

Shelley Podolny’s March 12 New York Times column, “The Digital Pileup,” started me thinking.  “Because electronic information seems invisible, we underestimate the resources it takes to keep it all alive.” Podolny reports global data usage of 1.2 zettabytes (a lot of gigabytes). For the US alone, 3% of the national power supply supports “server farms,” the giant data centers with aisles and aisles of servers. 
 
Three per cent may not seem like a lot. As the world reels from one natural disaster to another, at least some of which have to be connected to rising energy consumption, it adds up. On other occasions, I have commented on how the move to cloud computing—Salesforce, Google, and so on—reduces energy usage. It concentrates resources. Hmm. Maybe it only makes power demands more manageable against the rate of growth of data storage. 
 
Podolny suggests that by 2020, “the [information] volume  will be 44 times greater than it was in 2009. There finally may be, in fact, T.M.I.” It’s that last comment that prompted this reflection. My job often involves helping organizations collect more data—facilitating better contact management and data tracking, enabling and encouraging richer web content, and so on. For sure, planning involves balancing need against capacity. Yet the main trend is more. 
 
In this context, Podolny says, “Despite the conveniences our online lives provide, we end up being buried by data at home and at work. An overabundance of data makes important things harder to find and impedes good decision-making. Efficiency withers as we struggle to find and manage the information we need to do our jobs. Estimates abound on how much productivity is lost because of information overload, but all of them are in the hundreds of millions of dollars yearly.” 
 
Even as organizations trend toward collecting more, better data, we need to regularly ask when we have too much.  Some thoughts.

Taking the Time to Focus on What We Need

First, data needs regular cleansing. And no one is immune. Just this week, we purged 30% of the contacts in a key internal system. They had been mingled in when we upgraded from an older system, marked as inactive and ignored. Yet however dormant, it turns out that gaps compared to current needs hindered synchronization with our time tracking system. For a year, it has added additional monthly steps.  
 
When you bulk load old data into new systems, sometimes rules of data integrity and validation get by-passed to shoehorn old data in. You may use Demand Tools, the Data Loader or other powerful data manipulation tools to get started with Salesforce. Yet you (or more likely we) may be tempted to leave some new data rules turned off until mounds of historical data find their new home.  
 
Lesson one: Data storage may cost less, but still bears an organizational price. Better to invest the time up front, and then through periodic reviews, of old, data clutter. 
 
Second, while some still wrestle with getting more news up on their website, too much content holds others back. It’s really the same story for content as with data.  Has your migration to  Drupal or other modern system gotten pushed back and back because of the weight of old site content? Less frequently used pages still may need tons of attention  to realign them with new site navigation and search tools.
 
Some possible lessons here about large web projects: Focus first on the 30, 40, 50 pages, or whatever the number, that get used the  most. Those probably need to be rewritten anyhow. Leave the 80-90% of the pages that get used only 10 or 20% of the time in their old format until they can be pared down, reindexed if still needed, or archived into some other format. 
 
Another lesson: If you see a new website coming, make sure now you have good, usable analytics on the current site. When it comes times to begin active planning, you want to know which pages and resource get used the most.  You also want to know which things visitors search for the most, may exist, but don’t get accessed, suffering under the dead weight of the total information past. 

Even Good Back-ups Proliferate Data Overload

Third, in a time where we need to pay more attention to back-up policies, we can’t neglect duplicative and redundant data storage. We understand this better about social  media. Once a photo posts, copies may proliferate very quickly, both by users and by the systems they sit on. Podolny estimates that 70% of information storage today is generated by individual use, and that 75% of all data storage is duplicative. 
 
Lessons here: We need to make it easier for staff and constituents people to forward links to content and use it on line, and not just attach full document copies to group emails. As for formal back-up, the storage for a few hundred web pages, documents and multimedia needs to be multiplied by how many back-up copies exist. A “good” back-up policy many mean multiple copies in many places. Organizational email may also be multiply backed up, consuming gigabytes of storage. The lesson here is, make sure you do have redundant back-ups, yet also make sure that they haven’t grown so large and unwieldy as to be impractical when you need them. 
 
Fourth, with data back-up especially, we need to be sure of our confidential information. A client finally gave up on using social security number as a convenient contact search index. Removing the data point from active use is one thing. Now comes the hard part: finding all those back-ups, including ones in inconvenient archival formats, that still pose a data security risk. 
 
As Podolny points out, “In the corporate realm, companies stockpile data because keeping it seems easier than figuring out what they can delete. This behavior has hidden costs and creates risks of security and privacy breaches as data goes rogue.” Data security laws, such as the new ones in Massachusetts, apply equally to nonprofit organizations as to private businesses. 
 
Polodny’s call to action makes sense: “We can live a productive digital life without hoarding information. As stockholders and consumers, we can demand that our companies and service providers aggressively engage in data-reduction strategies. We can clean up the stockpiles of dead data that live around us, be wiser data consumers, text less and talk more. We can try hitting delete more often.”
 
The overall message: whether for the environment or our sanity, even though technology is giving us “more” digital data, less may be more.
 
 

 

Salesforce and Chatter - What the Heck is It?

You might have seen a couple of bizarre ads during the Super Bowl this year for this thing called "Chatter" and wondered to yourself, "what the heck was that?"  Or, if you're me, you frantically shouted and gestured at the TV and yelled, "That's what I do!  Yeah, that's Salesforce!  That...uh...what the heck is this random ad supposed to show?  And how much did that just cost?!"

Well, I don't know exactly how much those 2 ads cost, but I'm sure it was plenty. Here's what Chatter is: a private social network for your company (read: internal Facebook) that is integrated into the Salesforce platform.  Salesforce has been hyping this since their 2009 annual Salesforce conference, Dreamforce

I've been working with large and small organizations who are using Chatter to varying degrees of effectiveness, and I think there are some tips that can help prepare you to use this new tool. 

  • You need to have a critical mass of people using Chatter, otherwise it looks like a few people who showed up way early to a party, and no one else is showing up.  Depressing, right?  And then no one sees the value of using it.
  • It helps to have some guidelines up front on what people should use it for: sharing work and some personal info is okay, but maybe sharing way-too-personal info is off-limits.  I don't think you need to be too heavy-handed here, but written policies always make the HR department happy.  :)  Kivi Leroux-Miller has some good resources for this.
  • Since there's no way to pilot this with a small group (pet peeve of mine), prepare people for this before you turn it on!  Have a lunch and learn about how you might use it.  Brainstorm with people some cool things they could do.  Above all, get people excited about it, and they'll see the value, even in a very small org.
  • This may seem obvious, but you should use it too!  You can be a model of how best to use a new tool like this. Sharing status updates, posting fun links, updating people on what you're doing are all valuable things to use Chatter for.

Are you using Chatter at your nonprofit?  Is it useful?  A waste of time?  Let me know what you think!  

A Great List of Social Media Case Studies!

 Learning about what other people have done- where they are successful and where they struggle- can be highly informative.  And when those case studies are about social media, the uncharted territory of online communications, they are even better.   We love case studies over here at Idealware, we know that you do too!

 www.socialmediatoday.com has published an awesome list of social media case studies.  Even better, it is a list of links to other lists of social media case studies.  Worth a look.  

Here is the link (hat tip to John Hayden for posting this recently): http://socialmediatoday.com/igiedrius/268023/fantabulous-lists-social-media-case-studies

Enjoy!

(and if you see any that are particularly interesting, pull out the link and share it in the comments)