I’ve had the pleasure of consulting closely with countless unique clients with diverse missions, yet all face a common challenge. They struggle to position their organizations effectively in a manner which communicates the impact of their organization to various demographic segments. The challenge, common among most non-profits, goes beyond messaging to encompass internal operational silos, departmental or programmatic territorialism, false profiling of market segments due to lack of proper evidence, and an overall challenge in defining each organization’s role in changing the world for the community they serve in an appropriate way – all the while addressing the communications preferences of disparate populations. Does this sound like too many balls to juggle in the air? I argue this is not the case.

More often than not, organizations approach challenges such as user-intuitive information architecture (navigation) on their web site and through other communications channels without taking into account how unlike individuals will navigate and interpret information. An exercise recently conducted with one client’s technology and web review board unexpectedly triggered surprised looks as board members realized for the first time that individuals tasked with the same objective in reviewing, critiquing or navigating a web site will not only interpret and perceive navigation, visuals, interactivity, and messaging differently, but will adamantly argue that their views apply to all. They’re all disagreeing, but they’re all right – their way is “the right way.” One of the first lessons I learned in my career in non-profit fund development and marketing came to me from a mentor and VP at the world’s most popular cola creator. In chairing my organization’s PR and marketing committee, he operated under the mantra, perception is reality.

Perception is, indeed reality. This is an immutable truth. And each individual will perceive differently, regardless of how appropriately we package our organization with targeted messaging, visuals, and interactivity. I would imagine that if you’re reading this blog, you’re a non-profit professional. Furthermore, I would be led to believe that you have a particular interest in driving outcomes – fund development, awareness, program, or countless others. I’m not psychic, I simply determined my audience prior to crafting this message. You may be a membership, conservation, healthcare, higher education, grant making, social service, or another variety of NPO, but we all have one unifying commonality. We all seek to achieve one of the aforementioned outcomes, and we do so by our ability to influence individuals.

In order for us to successfully influence, we must understand our audience. As an example, as I choose words in this blog, I’m cautious about my use of constituent, member, supporter, prospect, client, community member, and other words. In marketing terms, these are all held equal as the consumer. However, my guess is that my use of the term consumer may prevent this information from truly resonating with my various target audiences, whether it be a marketing, development, program, or other executive-level officer.

Put it in perspective – it’s the equivalent of having a conversation with a current or prospective supporter, a VIP who you know everything about, whether it be from experience and relationship or BI. From recreational and philanthropic interests, to where his or her daughter practices ballet, you’re hopefully educated on who the individual is, what he or she likes, and the appropriate means by which they should be solicited. The same is true for audiences online – audiences that have hopefully been defined and segmented to the fullest extent your due diligence and resources will allow or, as is unfortunately often the case, assumed that you know their motivations and interests and structured your packages and appeals (aka information in the form of a pitch) based on false assumptions.

If the latter is the case, the most important lesson any non-profit afflicted by this misdirection can learn is that everyone is different – the best thing we can do is understand and guide our operations by this principle so that we can unite and target information by commonalities among these varying populations of clients, supporters, and prospects. After all, diversifying your target demographic is like diversifying funding – if you can build affinity with a new group, or strengthen relationships with existing groups of supporters, you’re better able to solicit and steward these individuals in the most personal, educated way. Go forth, and question your web site. Does it inspire you to get involved? Are you compelled to give? Do you come away from this interactive experience better educated about how your support (money, time, connections, etc…) impacts your organization’s ability to deliver a meaningful impact to the constituency it serves? This questioning could continue in perpetuity; however, if you said no to any of the above step back. Breathe deeply. Define your existing audience as it relates to your mission. Segment them as appropriate. And finally, craft an interactive experience that boils the blood and inspires – an experience that does so with the same standard of personal touch you would provide your most avid supporters.

Josh Hopkins is internet solutions manager at Blackbaud Interactive where he works with organizations around the globe to deliver executable, constituent-focused marketing strategies that drive fund development and engagement success for clients. Josh has worked and volunteered extensively within and alongside the non-profit sector, serving as chief marketing and fund development officer for the nation’s largest Hispanic social service provider prior to the Blackbaud team.

Whatever your comfort zone, these technologies are here and as the public grows more Web savvy, they expect you to be up on the latest trends. One of my favorite parts of this new tech wave is that it’s relatively low impact on one’s budget. The Internet has in fact given Joe Public the keys to authorship through numerous free social networking and blogging sites. (They even let me on!) So, aside from the obvious commitment of time and creativity there’s no reason for you not to join the game.

Next question: What might a nonprofit use such tech for? Well, on a VERY informal basis, I surfed to a few well known nonprofit Web sites who I figured would be up on their tech and might offer some good examples. I found stories of volunteers and people touched by the organizations, but they had pretty much all gone through marketing first. What I was hoping for was a direct voice of organization members and volunteers.

Never fear, this building is full of people who work with wonderful people like you every day. So I asked around and found an org (who is a client) who is doing some very cool things—Jesuits of the California Province. I do want to say that I’m not trying to hawk our products here. I just want to point out some of the ways this org is trying to connect with current and new constituents as soon as they surf in. And if you have some other great examples, send them in! The more people see, the more ideas we can generate.

The Jesuit Home page offers options to compose multimedia prayers, listen to or download podcasts, join discussion boards, read blogs, or listen to music composed by Jesuits. There is lots of other information on the page, but these are all interactive ways to give surfers a full picture of what the organization does. It also gives them access to other constituents and the people who make the organization work. This means that surfers are connecting at a person-to-person level with real, unedited people. And that makes a big difference.

I can offer up another example—Science online. Science is a well-known, high-profile scientific journal, also part of the nonprofit community, that normally serves just the scientific community. On their Web site, however, they’ve expanded their outreach to try to include educators and a broader audience. Full articles are restricted to members, but you can see right in the middle of the page a link to their podcasts, which provide free access to the same topics covered in the journal. Their multimedia site also offers interactive videos perfect for use in the classroom and complete with teacher resources.

In this case, Science is opening up parts of their value that is normally reserved for members only and sharing it in a new, more accessible way (way more user-friendly then the peer reviewed articles). This offers extended benefits to teachers, who may surf on more often for teaching tools, and students, who may start by saying “This is neat” and end by having a serious interest in science.

The point is there are ALWAYS ways to make your site more interactive, adding value and a gee whiz factor at the same time. That translates into more people who want to check out your site, who want to spend more time on your site, who tell their friends about your site, and who ultimately may be more likely to get involved.

I have to admit, sheepishly, that I’ve never really thought about day of week or time of day with regard to sending email. It’s become such an all consuming and amorphous medium that if you’re like me, you start checking it shortly after waking and don’t stop until right before bed–seven days a week.

But when you’re trying to get someone’s attention to act on your product, in this case, your mission, timing can be important. The article, “Timing for Success: When to Fill Consumers’ Inboxes,” gives the lowdown from marketing professionals about when they get the best responses from emails. For example, Tuesdays generally see the busiest email traffic, while Saturday sees the least.

Most of the information is anecdotal, but it offers a great starting place to think about how you can make sure readers have the time to open and respond to your message. Now get emailing!

The text on the balloon reads, “Drive one day less and look how much carbon monoxide you’ll keep out of the air we breathe.”

The takeaway here is to always be on the lookout for original ways to get your message out there. Getting impressions via alternative methods can have great results, as seen here.

Via, AdGoodness.

• Consider your audience. You have people of all backgrounds and experiences surfing as equals. To accommodate this wide-spread audience, you’re going to want to write at about a ninth grade reading level or less. Newspapers generally follow this principle. They want their work to be as accessible as possible and so should you.
• Think about attention span. (again) As we continue on in our sound-byte driven, media overload world, people’s attention spans seem to shrink at a rate equivalent to the speed with which new toys for them to play with are developed. Not to be cynical or anything. What I’m trying to say is that you need to get to your point quickly. If you don’t capture attention quickly, your reader might surf on.
• Think about the mechanics of reading on screen. Depending on the machine a person is using, the screen size and thus the amount of text seen can vary widely. This is one of the reasons that long Faulkner-esque paragraphs don’t work well. Also, it’s really hard to follow visually as you scroll. Keep paragraphs shorter with a decent amount of space in between them.

Another quirk of Web reading is the effect your Web site’s design might have on readability. Always think readability when you’re looking at design! It doesn’t matter how pretty your site is, if you’re using yellow text on a checkerboard background, I, at least, will have a headache about five minutes after I start trying to read. If I even decide to put in the effort.

I’m absolutely sure none of you have gone to that extreme; however, color choice may have a bigger impact then you think. For example, my mom once had a boss who was colorblind. Someone sent her an email with callout text in yellow. Guess what? She didn’t see anything.

If you want to learn more about Web readability/accessibility, check out the Web Accessibility Initiative.

Keep these high-level tips in mind, and all the wonderful things your high school English teach taught you about grammar, and you should be headed on the right track.

Before I get to the meat of what I want to talk about today, a very quick intro. Unlike some of the others on the blog, I’m a bit less techy. I’m a word person. As such, I want to talk about the power of words…

What first drew you to your own organization? What was it about the mission, the people, the results that made you want to dedicate your time? What gets you out of bed in the morning?

Whatever the answers to those questions, those are probably the same things that are going to motivate donors and volunteers. As you all know, it’s much harder to say no during a face-to-face solicitation then it is over the phone or through the mail. If your communications with prospective donors and volunteers personifies your mission, it’s going to be equally hard to say no.

Use the voice of the people on the ground—blogs from community organizers or field agents, videos of the direct benefits of your work, recordings of the beautiful music you create, and donor stories that tell why a person had to give are all ways to get your message out there.

This is what your freshman composition teacher was talking about when he or she said “Show; don’t tell.”

It’s one thing to say my organization provides medical help to third-world countries. It’s another to show you the before and after pictures that show what a difference removing a five-pound tumor from someone’s face makes (if you’re brave—some of the images are on the graphic side: http://www.mercyships.org/site/c.agLOI4OFKrF/b.1078001/k.AC82/Success_Stories.htm). Creating that human connection is what makes people open their hearts (and subsequently, their pocketbooks).

You’re probably saying, “We already do that. We have a whole section on our Web site for success stories.” But that generally requires digging. It means that someone has to care enough about your organization to go looking for the story. You want to catch the casual surfer and keep that person’s attention. Keep your success stories. Having that library shows the range of your successes. But also feature a Reader’s Digest version of your most compelling success on your Home page. Link it to the full version and the rest of your successes. Keep the stories human and include whatever detail pulled at your heart. Combine it with easy access to a donate button and who knows what might happen.

By simply slipping these cutout children into existing table tents, their message was delivered to a captive audience with minimal impact on the community - exactly the way guerrilla campaigns should go down.

The text reads:

Over two lakh children live in places you can never imagine. Help the Children. Donate.

I think it’s important to show that guerrilla marketing efforts should still be implemented when the situation calls for it, despite what happened in Boston two weeks ago. Campaigns like these resonate strongly with an audience who is increasingly turned off by TV, print, and email advertisements.

via Ads of the World

If you haven’t, you’re not alone. Forgetting to update is commonplace, and I see it all the time. Data was needed, so yesterday I checked out the top 100 nonprofits. What I found was shocking.

I expected a few would have forgotten, but not 34%. I even saw a few that still were listed as 2005 - wow! But don’t feel bad - the top 100 for-profits didn’t fair much better, with 18% forgetting to update.

Are you still reading? Have you checked your site yet?

There are many ways to handle your Web site’s copyright info, some of which require no updating at all. I took a look how nonprofits and for-profits were displaying copyright info, and was able to identify five buckets to drop each method into:

• Current - Example: © 2007 OrgName
  By far the most popular, this method displays the current year next to the copyright symbol. Take a look at the Googles, Ebays, and Microsofts of the world and you’ll see they’ve adopted this method. Why? Not only does it give an impression of being up-to-date, but it uses the least amount of pixels. If you go this route, you must remember to update it each year, or use some JavaScript to do it for you.
• Span - Example: © 2003 - 2007 OrgName
  This method displays the range of years for which the work is copyrighted, usually spanning from the launch year to the current year. It shows off how long you’ve been around and gives the impression that the site is updated, but you will have to change the date each year.
• Launch - Example: © 2003 OrgName
  This is the method actually prescribed by copyright law, but is very hard to find in the wild. Why? If you went to a site with a copyright date of 1998 would you buy something or trust them? It gives the impression of laziness or outdated content, something a netizen always tries to avoid.
• Text - Example: Use of text, images and other content on this website…
  Some sites just provide their copyright information in paragraph form with no date to be found. While unconventional, this method requires no updating, and gives you a chance to be specific with your conditions. But if you are a fan of standards, I would steer clear of this one.
• None - Example: ___________
  This method is for people who drive without seatbelts and go spelunking alone. Some people like to take chances, but I would recommend using one of the previous four methods to protect your content. Then take the day of and go skydiving.

The data for the methodology survey is below. You’ll notice most sites stick to displaying the current year, with spanning being the next most popular. I think it is noteworthy that 9% of nonprofits had no copyright info on their sites whatsoever, something that did not happen in the for-profit sector.

Two final thoughts. First, make sure your site’s copyright information is up-to-date - It just makes good sense. Second, I am not an attorney, and nothing in this post should be construed as legal advice - I didn’t even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

That’s where SixDegrees.org, AOL Instant Messenger, and Network for Good come in. Someone had the brilliant idea to put these three ingredients into a giant Web 2.0 blender in the hopes of producing a tasty, social fundraising smoothie – and it looks like they have succeeded.

With Kevin Bacon as the natural pitchman, 6Degrees.org is asking donors to choose a nonprofit, then get 6 friends to give to the same organization. Network for Good is covering the online donations, while AOL’s MySpace equivalent AIM Pages handles the social aspect. The idea is to use a social network to form impromptu giving circles…got it?

No? Here, I’ll let Mr. Bacon tell it like it is:

All you have to do is use the AIM for Good module on this page. Simply pick the charity that you would like to rally support for, enter up to six e-mail addresses of your buddies and family members, and write them a note asking for their support. The e-mail that they’ll receive will give them the opportunity to give, right there, to the charity you’ve selected. All transactions will be private and secure.

Another way you can help is by making your own AIM Page, which can include the AIM for Good module on it too. So, when your buddies stop by your page, they’ll be reminded to get the word out and rally support with their friends and families.

While I love the concept, the whole things feels a little thrown together. When you read about it, or hear Kevin talk about it, it’s not crystal clear who is involved and exactly what you are supposed to do. With some tighter integration and better defined user paths, I can see this program really taking off. Cheers to everyone involved!

Viral marketing is hard to track using metrics, but it gets noticed never the less. Local newspaper and television coverage are both free and potent, so don’t forget to explore concepts like this at your next planning meeting.

via Houtlog