island94.org

Douglas Rushkoff wraps up Life, Inc. with the clearest conception of “act local, think global” I’ve read (and usually seems to be misinterpreted).

Instead of fighting corporations with corporations of our own [like nonprofits--Ben], or working through corporations to reduce their negative impact on society, we’re better off reinventing ourselves as humans. We live on a terrain and in a dimension they can pollute but to which they will never belong. By working on this human-scaled landscape instead, we can create changes in our own lives and communities that stand a chance, in aggregate, of trickling up and changing how the big world operates as well.

We can’t look for those kinds of changes overnight. The grand expectations we have for ourselves and our achievements are really just the false promises of consumerism, brand culture and the politics of revolutionary change. This is the ideological heritage of the Renaissance, and what brought us into the cycle of utopian hopes and alienated cynicism we’re churning through today.

We’d each like to launch a national movement, create the website that teaches the world how to build community from the bottom up, develop the curriculum that saves public schools, or devise the clever anti-marketing media campaign that breaks the spell of advertising once and for all. But these ego trips are the artifacts of the strident individualism we were taught to embrace. The temptation to save the whole world—and get the credit—comes at the expense of steps we might better take to make our immediate world a more fruitful, engaging, sustainable, and satisfying place. A successful movement depends on getting attention from media and institutions that are dead set against recognizing our ability to create value ourselves, and for its own sake. The minute they find out what we’re up to, it’s their job to dash our hopes and return our attention to the false idols they’re selling us.

I’m thoroughly enjoying Douglas Rushkoff’s Life, Inc.—”how the world became a corporation and how to take it back”.

The following comes from the middle of a discussion of how marketers themselves are stuck in wealth bondage, and a critique of Malcolm Gladwell:

This [current] generation of ad strategists and corporation psychologists is well aware of the 1960s advertising legends David Ogilvy and Leo Burnett, but go blank when I mention the Creel Commission, Edward Bernays, or NAM. Two generations removed from public relations’ founding fathers, they seem oblivious to the biases that were so explicitly a part of their work. They use techniques that assume the primacy of the corporation, the universal benefits of mass persausion, and the incapacity of average human beings to make decisions in their own best interest. They behave as automatically as the consumers they hope to control, promoting a corporate agenda at the expense of agency.

When push comes to shove, they quote a member of the new intelligentsia, such as the New Yorker star Malcolm Gladwell, whose books pretend to offer sociology or more, but really just promote an updated view of the stupid masses witha few marketing tips thrown in. Gladwell’s best seller, The Tipping Point portrays human society as a field of iron shavings moving unconsciously between magnetic poles. All you need to put one over on the crowd is self-confidence, magic, and a few friends…

Revealing techniques like website “stickiness” and the power of “word of mouth” to sell products, Gladwell might well have been writing an update to Vance Packard’s The Hidden Persuaders, which revealed the advertisers’ arts to the reading public for the first time back in the 1950s. But Gladwell instead appraises these techniques from the cool distance of an anthropologist. Though not a scientist himself, he sees simple, scientific adjustments to culture via technology, media, and marketing as the answer to our biggest problems. Humans will respond accordingly. It’s all just chaos math.

The book then goes on to compare Reality TV to the Stanley Milgram Prison Experiment: thoroughly engrossing.

Minimal comment on Microsoft entering the retail space with Apple-esque stores—dumb—but I liked the press release:

We’re working hard to transform the PC and Microsoft buying experience at retail by improving the articulation and demonstration of the Microsoft innovation and value proposition so that it’s clear, simple and straightforward for consumers everywhere.”

You do though have to mis-pronounce proposition as proposation to really maintain the flow. That would also help to further increase the irony of the ending clause.

The following is from a handout I created for the CTCnet Conference in which I presented on capacity building models for community engagement. You can download the handout with worksheet (PDF), or read the overview below.

Introduction to Community Engagement

The core competency for any organization—private or nonprofit, funder or grantee—is learning to manage change while maintaining high performance on standard functions and simultaneously building capacity to learn and evolve.

—Evaluations of Capacity Building: Lesson from the Field,Alliance for Nonprofit Management

Communities form the context in which nonprofit organizations operate. Driven by community needs and powered by community resources, successful organizations must continually assess how their organization’s mission and programs fit into the evolving landscape of their communities.

Every organization has the ability to adapt and succeed, but may lack the tools and guiding ideas to make sense of the situations they face. Organizations that are continually expanding their capacity to create their future require the information and tools needed to successfully engage their community.

Building an organization that can adapt and thrive requires two main competencies:

1. The organization regularly assesses community needs and resources
2. The organization regularly responds to new/emerging needs and resources

Building these two competencies into an organization with limited abilities and resources requires that the organization seeks innovative methods to create community participation and collaboration.

Community Engagement

“…community engagement is the process of working collaboratively with and through groups of people affiliated by geographic proximity, special interest, or similar situations to address issues affecting the well-being of those people. It is a powerful vehicle for bringing about environmental and behavioral changes that will improve the health of the community and its members. It often involves partnerships and coalitions that help mobilize resources and influence systems, change relationships among partners, and serve as catalysts for changing policies, programs, and practices.”

—Stephen B. Fawcett, Work Group for Community Health and Development

Community engagement supports your organization’s mission, programs and capacity by ensuring they remain relevant to community needs and environmental forces. Developing your organizations Community Engagement competency is Capacity Building. This may include the creation of:

• Assessment of Community Opportunities and Dangers
• Interpretation of your mission/programs and create messages for specific audiences
• Development of programs that meet new/emerging needs
• Creation of partnerships that generate or share resources and information
• Mobilization of people and resources (internal, external and potential) to make achievements
• Processes to invite and accept community feedback
• Opportunities to invite community members into your organization and leadership

In the context of community engagement, the creation and sharing of resources goes beyond just financial resources. It may include: human resources (staff and volunteer time), physical resources (office space, materials and in-kind donations), and social-resources (word-of-mouth, recognition, legitimacy, “buzz”). Additionally, community engagement strategies may have benefits beyond the scope of their initial purposes.

5 Core Questions of Community Engagement

1. Do we know what the community needs?
2. Are we asking the community what it needs?
3. Does everyone in the community know what it is we do for them?
4. Are we inviting the community to help us help them?
5. Are we using our organization to its fullest potential?

Community Engagement as an Ongoing Process

In order to be successful, Community Engagement should be approached as a practical, time- and resource-bound process; the goal is not to produce a complex or exhaustive plan that is impossible to implement. Instead, community engagement should be viewed as a series of ongoing and/or incremental strategies and achievable initiatives that seek to identify and engage specific groups within the communities your organization operates within. This process involves:

1. Developing Community Engagement Strategies
2. Determine the Goals of the Plan
3. Plan Out Who to Engage
4. Develop Engagement Strategies for Those Individuals You Already Know
5. Develop Engagement Strategies of Those Individuals You Do NOT Already Know
6. Prioritize those Activities
7. Create an Implementation Plan (strategy)
8. Monitor Your Progress (measurement)
9. Maintain those Relationships (sustainability)

A Basic Logic Model

Problem Statements and Goals

When seeking to design a Community Engagement initiative, assessing needs and converting them into a Problem Statement and Goals to address it can be difficult. Two questions to ask are:

What are the core-competencies/abilities/resources/skills of our organization that are not being fully-utilized within the community?

…and…

What strategies or initiatives would significantly impact our ability to effectively offer/expand programs or maintain the capacity of our organization? (size, scope, resources, volunteers, etc.)

These sections should seek to define the Who, What, and Where of your proposal.

Capacity Building Logic Models vs. Program Logic Models

Both Capacity Building Projects and Programs share the same Logic Model structure. The primary difference between the two is that the goals of Programs relate to specific changes that will take place within clients or individuals served by the program. In comparison, Capacity Building projects have goals that alter the programs, structure or systems of the organization itself.

Rationales, Assumptions and External Factors

Rationales are the Why of your proposal. What questions might someone raise as to the efficacy of the endeavor and how would you respond to them? What knowledge or experience do you have that would aid in explaining why such a project would succeed?

Assumptions are existing resources, skills or competencies that are already in place and your project will rely upon (but may not directly affect). Thinking critically about Assumptions will help you interpret your project for people who may not be knowledgeable about your organization or community.

External Factors describe issues or events that are outside the scope of your project but may help or hinder it. These may take place within the organization (e.g. staff or leadership changes) or outside of the organization (e.g. economic or social crises).

Resources and Activities

Below are some activities that could be incorporated into existing programs or communication strategies. It’s important to note which of these are 1-way and which are 2-way, which might be more or less effective in your community (or for certain groups within your community) and how the feedback generated will be incorporated into your organizations services and strategies.

• Community interviews/Face-to-face meetings
• Informal meetings
• Briefings
• Workshops
• Public meetings and hearings
• Panel discussion, brain-storming
• Shared Initiatives and Partnerships
• Public notice
• Fact sheets
• Telephone contacts
• Telephone Hotline
• Door-to-door canvassing
• Bulletin Boards
• Posters Facility tours
• Field Trips
• Special events
• Radio
• Television
• Films/Screenings
• Exhibits
• Internet Sites or Online Communities
• Newsletter, Newspaper insert
• News conference
• Press-kits
• Advisory Boards
• Volunteer Development
• Program Development

Measuring Outputs and Outcomes

Outputs are tangible products that are produced as a part of your project. They may include documentation, lists of contact information, curriculum or communications pieces. Outputs are the easiest to measure (they have been produced or have not) and also may produce the longest-lasting benefits because they will continue to exist beyond the completion of activities and may contribute to or influence further projects or strategies.

Outcomes are the results or impact of the activities your project performs. These outcomes should directly relate to producing the goals you have outlined for the project. Outcomes should be phrased in terms of change and be measureable. Outcomes can be split into short, medium and long-term parts.

1. Short Term Outcomes are the results you expect see immediately: numbers of volunteers, hours of programming, dollars raised, etc. (often numbers of things)
2. Intermediate Outcomes are the results you want to see over more time: increased name-recognition, program satisfaction, communications through a particular medium, etc. (often measured as percentages, e.g. percentage of people strongly satisfied, or percentage of clients referred through a website)
3. Long-term Outcomes are the results you hope to see eventually: greater access to resources, greater stability, feelings of support or recognition, etc. (often general feelings or perceptions one might acquire from personal stories or interviews)

More Resources

Evaluations of Capacity Building: Lessons from the Field (Book), Alliance for Nonprofit Management

http://www.allianceonline.org/publications/evaluation_of_capacity.page

Online Engagement Strategies and Skills, NTEN “We Are Media Project”,

http://www.wearemedia.org/Strategy+Module+5

Introduction to Community Engagement, Help 4 Nonprofits,

http://www.help4nonprofits.com/NP_Mktg_Marketing-vs-CommunityEngagement_Art.htm

Seven Areas of Nonprofit Excellence, New York Times Company Nonprofit Excellence Awards,

http://nytawards.fcny.org/npea/excellence/

Measuring Innovation, Skoll Foundation & Foundation Strategy Group,

http://www.skollfoundation.org/media/skoll_publications.asp

Spitfire Strategies Communications Tools: Smart Chart, Activation Point

http://www.spitfirestrategies.com/tools

Logic Model Development Guide, W.K. Kellogg Foundation
www.wkkf.org/Pubs/Tools/Evaluation/Pub3669.pdf

I just received a great set of questions to ask people when conducting Brand Interviews: if you’re trying to lock-down who you are and how to communicate that, it helps to ask people who know you and what they think. These are those questions.

• What do you personally value most about [YOUR ORGANIZATION]? Why is it important to you?
• What do you need/expect from an organization like [YOUR ORGANIZATION]? What other organizations could you/do you expect to meet those needs?
• How would you describe [YOUR ORGANIZATION] to someone who does not know it well? What words/phrases would you use? Why?
• How would you describe the personality of [YOUR ORGANIZATION]? What is it like to interact with the organization?
• In your mind, what does [YOUR ORGANIZATION] do well? What does it do better than any other, similar organization? Where is there room for improvement?
• What are your hopes and goals for the organization? If you were running the organization, what would you change (if anything). What should absolutely not change…what do you consider to be sacred?
• How do you get most of your information about what’s going on [YOUR ORGANIZATION]? How else could we effectively communicate with you?
• Do you visit the [YOUR ORGANIZATION] web site? What are you looking for there? What do you wish were included? How else could the web site be more useful to you?
• Is there anything else you want to tell me? Anything you wish I had asked you?

I’ve been meaning to type of some of my notes from the NTEN 2008 Conference, but the benefit of waiting is that someone will do it better. Like Britt Bravo: Notes from The Seven Things Everyone Wants: What Freud and Buddha Understood (and We’re Forgetting) about Online Outreach .

In short (lots more notes and examples in the link):

Need 1: To be SEEN and HEARD

Does your home page make people feel heard? Not many people give money because they read a well word-smithed mission statement. Effective sites and campaigns provide space for people to express themselves. Nonprofits need to truly listen to their supporters and acknowledge what they are saying.

Need 2: To be CONNECTED to someone or something

Engage people by connecting to what they (not you!) care about.

Need 3: To be part of something GREATER THAN THEMSELVES

Need 4: To have HOPE for the future

Doom and gloom, and finger-wagging messages don’t work.

Need 5: The security of TRUST

Police Academy 6: City Under Siege ipod

People are starved for a sense of trust in “the messenger.”

Need 6: To be of SERVICE

The #1 reason people stop giving to a nonprofit is that they feel like they are being treated like an ATM machine. They want to help, but they want to be of service, and to have different ways of serving. That need is not being fulfilled if all they hear is the unimaginative drumbeat of dollars.

Need 7: To want HAPPINESS for self and others

The core of Buddhism is that everyone wants happiness and to be free from suffering. The more you want happiness for others, the better it is for you, and them.