Executive Summary, continued
For those interested in getting started, we gleaned some tips from those already in the game:
Assess
your organization’s appetite for innovation.
Identify support among leadership and program officers. Note where relevant
online conversations are already taking place, with or without you.
Recognize
and garner the resources required.
Assess current staff capacity and identify areas where training, realignment
of priorities, or new positions may be needed.
Build
internal allies.
Educate leadership on the organizational benefits of technological innovation,
and the risks of inaction. Learn from other organizations that have been
early movers.
Be
strategic.
Don’t lead with the tool. Start with the foundation’s goals
and priorities. Choose a Web 2.0 technology or tool only if it will help
you tell the story you are trying to tell.
Leverage
the great work of others.
Most of the best Web 2.0 tools you will need have already been built and
employed by other organizations. There is no need to reinvent the wheel.
Go
slowly and build on successes.
Do a small experiment or pilot program for a specific period of time.
Then pause, step back, evaluate and reassess.
Among the key questions for the field to consider and pursue moving forward are:
Control
and transparency.
How comfortable will foundations become with the participatory nature
of Web communications? How long will it take foundations to adapt to this
new communications world?
Generational
digital divide.
Is the generation divide real when it comes to emerging technology? Will
it
take new leadership to truly adapt, or can early adopters model behaviors
for others to emulate?
Influence.
How can foundations best maintain and increase their influence over the
issues they care about? How will ideas and feedback generated from online
communications best influence grantmaking decisions?
Alignment.
If communication is less about a unidirectional message, and more about
how foundations engage with their audiences, what does this mean for integration
of communications and programs?
Evaluation
and measurement.
How will foundations assess and evaluate the impact or success of their
online communication efforts? What are the right metrics? And how are
the challenges inherent in the Web 2.0 world any different from the measurement
obstacles of traditional communication?
Individual
giving.
What are the implications of the rise of Internet-empowered individual
giving for foundations? How will nonprofits adapt to the need to interact
with foundations in a traditional way and social entrepreneurs in a new
way, and how will this affect their capacity?
Grantee
network building.
Should foundations be funding nonprofits to develop their capacity to
communicate with and build networks among their service recipients, donors,
practitioners, and volunteers? What is the right investment balance between
a foundation’s own communications efforts and that of its grantees?
Communicating
with the general public.
Should foundations take advantage of the opportunities Web 2.0 offers
to interact directly with the public? Is there a role for grantmaking
foundations to use their resources and Web 2.0 technologies to help create
networks of people interested in certain issues and connect them with
grantees to take action (donate, volunteer, advocate)? Could this be a
way to help advance progress on foundation priorities?
Certainly these questions do not have ready answers. Still, as many in the foundation sector wait for answers and weigh the risks and benefits, opportunities pass by daily. We do well to remember that without foundation support and innovation, mainstays of our communications infrastructure ranging from the Public Broadcasting Service to the 9-1-1 emergency system would never have been achieved.
So while we may not readily see that kind of impact in the Web 2.0 context, it is a disservice to society to assume that similar potential doesn’t exist. Rather than continuing to hesitate, foundations have an incredible opportunity to be bold and lead by example. At this point, the result of such efforts can only be imagined.
|
|
|
Related Links
|
