Maybe, maybe not. At the very least, in this climate of limited resources and jittery giving, traditional fundraising techniques are not serving well. We in the social issue community are rethinking how we ask, how we give and how we generate both funds and impact. The exercise of reevaluation is revolutionizing the field-- and traditional fundraising techniques are starting to look outdated.
Larry Keeley of Doblin spoke a few weeks ago at the Strategic Innovation Lab (sLab) at the Ontario College of Art and Design, about the role designers play in innovation. He called on us (designers and non-designers alike) to engage in platform thinking to conceive and prototype new futures. Within the context of design and innovation, Larry defines platforms as integrated offerings that create a unique and holistic user experience only loosely controlled by the platform owner. And even in the midst of a recession, Larry argues, there's never been a better, more dynamic time to engage in innovation and platform thinking, given both the widespread availability of tools and the current societal will to collaborate.
I've been thinking about platforms ever since that conversation. In the context of sustainable social change generally, the most effective platforms are integrated offerings that scale globally and across sectors, creating movement toward a just and equitable future shaped according to local values. Those platforms need supportive platforms that allow for dynamic and sustained resource generation and community engagement (through communication, storytelling and demonstration of impact). The following platforms look like they will emerge as the strongest ways to move the needle forward:
1) Donor engagement: Creating donor-centered infrastructure, in which donors' expectations and goals are directly integrated into the core of an initiative's mission and programs. This applies most often to high-level donors, requires active stewardship and communication-- and is akin to a partnership model.
2) Peer-to-peer fundraising: Funds are raised through grassroots networking, individual to individual. Twestival (Twitter-based fundraising for charity:water) is the most recent example of this. (Beth Kanter presents a thorough look at this effort on her blog.)
3) Open source activism: This is a phrase used by musician, activist and filmmaker Justin Dillon (Call and Response) to describe his efforts to increase participatory action and idea generation for social change.
4) Open source philanthropy: Increased availability and sharing of information in and among key stakeholders. GFEM has created a media database to connect media projects with funders on an open platform. Larry Keeley has also worked with the Rockefeller Foundation to innovate philanthropic giving and due diligence.
5) Impact investing: Creating global investment portfolios that maximize both financial return and non-financial benefits of scalable solutions to social and environmental problems. (A more grassroots example of this is HopeEquity.org, which creates micro-endowments that generate interest on capital.)
(Thanks to Michael Dila and Robin Uchida of Torch Partnership, a brilliant strategy and innovation firm and a sponsor of sLab, for inviting me to attend the sLab series. The exposure to Torch's work on cross-sector collaboration has enriched my own strategy practice. Thanks also to Jill Finlayson of the Skoll Foundation and socialedge.org, who has inspired our cross-site dialogue about issue fatigue, fundraising, media engagement and donor engagement platforms.)
Storytelling for Change: The Most Significant Change technique
Sean Howard made me aware of an innovative storytelling tool geared toward change/needs assessments, called the Most Significant Change (MSC). This technique is a form of participatory monitoring and evaluation that can be applied across a number of social issues.
The process--invented by Rick Davies nearly 14 years ago to meet challenges associated with monitoring and evaluating a complex participatory rural development program in Bangladesh-- involves the collection of significant change stories from participants and staff at the field level, followed by systematic selection of the most significant of these stories by designated stakeholders or staff. Once changes have been captured, various people sit down together, read the stories aloud and have regular, in-depth discussions about the value of reported changes and emerging patterns of focus. When the technique is implemented successfully, teams of people focus their attention on program impact.
This is the basic process:
1. Start and raise interest
2. Define domains of change
3. Define reporting period
4. Collect SC stories
5. Select most significant stories
6. Feed back results of selection process
7. Verify of stories
8. Quantify
9. Secondary analysis and meta-monitoring
10. Revise the system
I am particularly interested in the MSC technique because of its similarities to Appreciative Inquiry, a technique for change or growth strategy and organizational design that I like within in my own strategic planning practice. Also, Sean and I have been working together to create a program geared toward systemic change, using innovations in design thinking, visualization, user experience, organizational design and storytelling. We've been researching successful models of communication and evaluation- and the MSC technique is interesting in terms of systemic change. As Sean pointed out, the MSC technique has most often and successfully been applied vertically within organizations, but there are also valuable outcomes from that can arise from bringing external stakeholders into the process, such as enhanced donor engagement and partnership evaluations, which the user manual acknowledges in its section entitled "Innovation: Network Alternatives."
(Part of this comment is cross-posted from the ResistNetwork. Image taken from Rick Davies' blog.)
Summary: "Preaching to the Converted": Engaging Your Audience and Combating Issue Fatigue
I moderated an online discussion on ArtTribesNetwork, on engaging your audience to combat issue fatigue. The discussion participants were from The Fledgling Fund, Cinereach, the Center for Social Media at American University, The Skoll Foundation, Global Grassroots, The Tiziano Project, the NYC Leadership Academy and the Miami International Film Festival, as well as two independent filmmakers (Brian Glazer, Producer of What We Got: DJ Spooky’s Quest for the Commons, and Marilyn Perez) and a social media expert (Howard Greenstein). We fleshed out some interesting ideas during the hour.
The transcript is online at ArtTribesNetwork.com. Here is a brief summary of the discussion:
Causes of issue fatigue
We briefly discussed causes of issue fatigue (also calling it compassion fatigue or psychic numbing). One reason audiences might disengage from a cause is their perception that there has either been no effective activism strategy put into place, or that there is no effective intervention or forward movement arising from activist efforts.
Another currently relevant reason is the economic crisis that affects our interests at home, which cause audience members to focus less on “distant” issues.
Similarly, issue fatigue hits audiences for causes that are large (hitting vast numbers of people) and/or “removed” from audience members’ daily lives faster than for issues to which they can relate personally or which center on one person in particular.
Keeping issue fatigue at bay
Discussion participants detailed their recommendations for keeping their audiences interested and committed. While you can’t necessarily apply the same questions and strategies to social issue media projects that have disparate or unique goals, the participants did come up with an overarching framework for most social issue media campaigns.
(1) Start with
(a) An exceptionally committed outreach team
(b) Sufficient resources to carry through your outreach and engagement plans
(c) A select, interested audience that will help you move the issue forward by engaging in activism and increase audience numbers by spreading the word, and
(d) Clear outreach goals for each audience segment.
(2) Given that issue fatigue hits when audience members feel disconnected, audience members must feel as if they belong to the movement and feel ownership over the outcome of activist efforts. Our participants talked about the importance of creating a personal, emotional connection to the cause through
(a) Visual imagery,
(b) A strong narrative that focuses on the story of one affected person (be that a witness, victim or survivor), and
(c) The opportunity to contribute through user-generated media.
(3) Social issue media campaigns built on slow, collective and continual action are most effective. The more people are exposed to the message through multiple media, the more likely they'll be to respond and/or take action. Therefore, campaigns must provide a pathway to action through creative opportunities for engagement.
It helps to engage in transmedia efforts, by continually creating and delivering new media, information, technologies and opportunities in order to maintain attention, through multiple distribution channels (traditional as well as digital and online), along with the opportunity to engage personally and collectively, in the real world.
(4) To communicate with your base, participants agreed that web 2.0 tools and social networks create an instant, global audience and deliver media and information most effectively. Digital communications tools are particularly useful for convening people virtually; sharing information, resources and referrals; getting attention; and inviting participation. In addition, you can encourage your audience to promote your message to their contacts in their own words.
(5) Audience members respond when the issue is highlighted in the local or national press, as this keeps driving and creating new interest in the issue.
(6) Finally, audience members also respond when they see their efforts are working. Therefore, participants encouraged providing feedback loops and impact measurements.
The transcript is online at ArtTribesNetwork.com. Here is a brief summary of the discussion:
Causes of issue fatigue
We briefly discussed causes of issue fatigue (also calling it compassion fatigue or psychic numbing). One reason audiences might disengage from a cause is their perception that there has either been no effective activism strategy put into place, or that there is no effective intervention or forward movement arising from activist efforts.
Another currently relevant reason is the economic crisis that affects our interests at home, which cause audience members to focus less on “distant” issues.
Similarly, issue fatigue hits audiences for causes that are large (hitting vast numbers of people) and/or “removed” from audience members’ daily lives faster than for issues to which they can relate personally or which center on one person in particular.
Keeping issue fatigue at bay
Discussion participants detailed their recommendations for keeping their audiences interested and committed. While you can’t necessarily apply the same questions and strategies to social issue media projects that have disparate or unique goals, the participants did come up with an overarching framework for most social issue media campaigns.
(1) Start with
(a) An exceptionally committed outreach team
(b) Sufficient resources to carry through your outreach and engagement plans
(c) A select, interested audience that will help you move the issue forward by engaging in activism and increase audience numbers by spreading the word, and
(d) Clear outreach goals for each audience segment.
(2) Given that issue fatigue hits when audience members feel disconnected, audience members must feel as if they belong to the movement and feel ownership over the outcome of activist efforts. Our participants talked about the importance of creating a personal, emotional connection to the cause through
(a) Visual imagery,
(b) A strong narrative that focuses on the story of one affected person (be that a witness, victim or survivor), and
(c) The opportunity to contribute through user-generated media.
(3) Social issue media campaigns built on slow, collective and continual action are most effective. The more people are exposed to the message through multiple media, the more likely they'll be to respond and/or take action. Therefore, campaigns must provide a pathway to action through creative opportunities for engagement.
It helps to engage in transmedia efforts, by continually creating and delivering new media, information, technologies and opportunities in order to maintain attention, through multiple distribution channels (traditional as well as digital and online), along with the opportunity to engage personally and collectively, in the real world.
(4) To communicate with your base, participants agreed that web 2.0 tools and social networks create an instant, global audience and deliver media and information most effectively. Digital communications tools are particularly useful for convening people virtually; sharing information, resources and referrals; getting attention; and inviting participation. In addition, you can encourage your audience to promote your message to their contacts in their own words.
(5) Audience members respond when the issue is highlighted in the local or national press, as this keeps driving and creating new interest in the issue.
(6) Finally, audience members also respond when they see their efforts are working. Therefore, participants encouraged providing feedback loops and impact measurements.
MediaRights.org article on transmedia activism
MediaRights, a project of ArtsEngine, Inc., maximizes the the impact of social-issue documentaries and shorts within its community by helping filmmakers reach audiences, educators and librarians bring films into their classroom, and nonprofits and activists integrate media into their campaigns. They recently published my article on transmedia activism at their site. Thanks to Kasmore Rhedick, the online editor, for a great editing job.
User-generated mashups changing the face of copyright law
ZDNet published a piece today about copyright law and the need to adapt IP laws to the Internet-driven cultural shift towards user-generated related content and participation. Brad Lichtenstein (friend, colleague, filmmaker, and the original inspiration for my work on transmedia activism), who is active in thinking and writing about the commons, posted a comment on his site about participation and the public domain. Thanks to him for continuing the conversation.
Generating mashups (fair use derivative works) and the use of orphan works are two very pertinent legal issues currently facing social change media. While most people don't dispute the rights of artists and creators over their content and the ways that content is used or disseminated, I wonder if, in thinking about media for social change, we should revisit "fair use" in the context of educational or charitable purpose or some analogous purpuse. (Or if someone already has?). The Copyright Act currently allows for performances of a non-dramatic or musical work in educational or religious assembly contexts. What if that notion were expanded beyond performances to include mashups, derivative content, sampling, or use of orphans works? I'm not certain that would be a popular stance, but perhaps it's worth exploring.
(For more information about legal issues surrounding user-generated content, The Center for Social Media has a number of great papers and discussions on its site.)
Generating mashups (fair use derivative works) and the use of orphan works are two very pertinent legal issues currently facing social change media. While most people don't dispute the rights of artists and creators over their content and the ways that content is used or disseminated, I wonder if, in thinking about media for social change, we should revisit "fair use" in the context of educational or charitable purpose or some analogous purpuse. (Or if someone already has?). The Copyright Act currently allows for performances of a non-dramatic or musical work in educational or religious assembly contexts. What if that notion were expanded beyond performances to include mashups, derivative content, sampling, or use of orphans works? I'm not certain that would be a popular stance, but perhaps it's worth exploring.
(For more information about legal issues surrounding user-generated content, The Center for Social Media has a number of great papers and discussions on its site.)
Riptide Communications - a new affiliation
Riptide Communications provides press, public relations, and strategic communications services to groups and individuals committed to progressive social change, designing and executing effective media campaigns that play a pivotal role in promoting international human rights, peace and social justice, worker and immigrant rights, and environmental justice and public health causes. I am pleased to announce Lina Srivastava Consulting is now affiliated with Riptide Communications, to lend counsel on strategic planning, storytelling, new media and innovation, and to access their talents on press and public relations.
ResistNetwork: Share your ideas on social change
ResistNetwork has a page seeking ideas for social change, to collect and spread information about websites, online resources, articles or tools. I am part of the team that is curating the page-- the other team members are Jess Tyrrell at Germination, Wai Mun Yoon and Marc Silver. Take a look and send in a message to socialchange@resistnetwork.com.
More on transmedia activism
Paul Hawken's book about the "movement of movements" of activism to create change, Blessed Unrest, has been influential in the field of social justice-- and in my thinking on systemic change and local solutions-building; networks and linkages; and emergent vs. direct strategies.
Now Hawken is spearheading a film about the individuals involved in the movements described in the book. This is transmedia activism in action: The film is being produced through a purely participatory model and created entirely on the film’s website, where the film's production team will allow users to generate, edit and "select" the content that will eventually be synthesized into one central narrative. To fit completely into the transmedia activism model, the film would be distributed across multiple platforms-- though the distribution strategy for the film is still unclear.
(Thanks to Sameer Padania, director of The Hub, WITNESS, for our discussion about Hawken's project. The Hub is another brilliant example of how transmedia activism can work to raise awareness and inspire action.)
Now Hawken is spearheading a film about the individuals involved in the movements described in the book. This is transmedia activism in action: The film is being produced through a purely participatory model and created entirely on the film’s website, where the film's production team will allow users to generate, edit and "select" the content that will eventually be synthesized into one central narrative. To fit completely into the transmedia activism model, the film would be distributed across multiple platforms-- though the distribution strategy for the film is still unclear.
(Thanks to Sameer Padania, director of The Hub, WITNESS, for our discussion about Hawken's project. The Hub is another brilliant example of how transmedia activism can work to raise awareness and inspire action.)
Breathing Earth
My colleague, Juan Carlos Zaldivar (creator of Art Tribes Network) sent me the link to Breathing Earth, a website mapping real-time simulated CO2 emissions, birth and death rates and population by country. It's a brilliant website on its own and could be a great inspiration for use by third sector organizations to map a number of social change issues, including income inequality, mass atrocities, human rights data, environmental degradation, etc.
Cross posted at arttribesnetwork.com
Cross posted at arttribesnetwork.com
Participatory Media and Tapping into Technology: Repurposing McKinsey
In thinking about storytelling and content creation to promote social change initiatives, I revisited an article published late last year by The McKinsey Quarterly called "Eight business technology trends to watch." The article details emerging trends in the use of technology—particularly internet-based and related tools—that will continue to transform markets and business in the for-profit sector in the coming years. Four of the detailed trends, grouped under the heading "Managing Relationships," provide a good discussion point and analogy for participatory media for social change agents. These are:
1. Distributing co-creation
2. Using consumers as innovators
3. Tapping into a world of talent
4. Extracting more value from interactions
The article recommends that businesses should proactively shape these trends to increase wealth and economic value by using internet-based technologies, and social networking and communications tools. The authors recognize that technology alone can't unlock value, but must be combined with a new way of doing business, the most relevant of which is to foster "co-creation networks."
In the face of the current financial crisis, the tightness of funding to the third sector (which is already stretched for dollars and paid talent) makes it necessary for social change initiatives to create new economical and effective ways of “doing business,” and to be creative and aggressive in minimizing their cash outlay while maximizing their reach and building their audience. But while funding may be low, the social and political will to be engaged and “do good” is strong and continuously growing. (Paul Hawken’s writing on that in Blessed Unrest describes the networks arising from this will to improve societal conditions.) Combine the available technologies with the existing will to do good and business model innovation, and the trends outlined above might be adapted for third sector initiatives to increase return on social change initiatives. Here’s a brief description of how the trends might apply:
1. Distributing co-creation and 2. Using consumers (or, “beneficiaries”) as innovators
Just as corporations have started to harness marketing techniques to inspire product and service innovations from the collaboration between in-house developers and external stakeholders, so too can a social change initiative work with its stakeholders to encourage or solicit innovations in program or service delivery, raising awareness and inspiring action. The first two trends deal with building a co-creation network (and relate to the August 4th post below regarding transmedia storytelling).
The McKinsey Quarterly article notes that the Internet has become a “widespread platform for interaction, communication, and activism. Consumers increasingly want to engage online with one another and with organizations of all kinds.” The Internet and related Web 2.0 technologies have opened up new and cost-effective ways for social change initiatives to communicate with their base to raise awareness and inspire action. You only have to look at the number of causes and groups on Facebook, Twitter and similar sites to see the burst of social networking activity by third sector initiatives. Accessing stakeholders and beneficiaries to foster a co-creation network requires a similar technological effort—and has the added benefit of expanding the engaged audience and moving them from awareness to action. (There is another potential benefit in terms of fundraising organizations, in that engaged audiences are more likely to donate money; an engaged stakeholder is more likely to donate in kind, as well.)
External partners can offer objectivity, knowledge of market trends and insights on the ground—particularly in locations remote from a nonprofit’s corporate office—that can help shape program development and allow nonprofits to delegate and decentralize innovation (and, depending on the structure of the relationship, lessen costs). Companies that involve customers in design, testing and marketing get better insights into customer needs and behavior. Similarly, social change initiatives that involve their stakeholders and their beneficiaries in program design, testing and marketing can inspire “loyalty” and adherence to mission and vision, speed up development cycles and improve accountability. Keystone provides a good example of employing co-creation to work with its beneficiaries in South Africa and the Philippines (where it has ground staff, as well) to create and implement programs that enhance organizational efficacy. Keystone also works with like-minded organizations in strategic collaborative partnerships that have agreed to support testing and application of the model.
There is one caution here, also inspired by the article. In opening up innovation to stakeholders and beneficiaries, you must be sure that you are not overly swayed by “information gleaned from a vocal minority,” and also that you continue to pay attention to both short- and long-range needs of your organization and beneficiaries.
3. Tapping into a world of talent and 4. Extracting more value from interactions
The third and fourth trends allow for more effective work flow, both internally and externally to an organization. In terms of tapping into external talent, interactive technologies allow cost-effective outsourcing to specialists, consultants and independent contractors. “As more and more sophisticated work takes place interactively online and new collaboration and communications tools emerge, companies can outsource increasingly specialized aspects of their work and still maintain organizational coherence.” This could be especially useful to nonprofit organizations, no matter what size, but particularly for small- to mid-range organizations. Because of the problem of financing—and despite what I can see as an increasing number of conversations about the need for more foundation and donor funding to support administrative activities—nonprofit organizations are more stretched than ever. Nonprofit staff members often wear more than one administrative hat to keep within budget. I’m not certain how many nonprofits outsource or off-shore their administrative activities—or even how many create partnerships with other nonprofits to share back office or program/service delivery functions—but since interactive technologies are making it easier and less costly to integrate and manage the work of outsiders, a number of functions (including innovation as described above, and administrative tasks, such as finance, IT or operations) can be outsourced here or abroad by nonprofit organizations.
Relative to enhancing communications within an organization, or between an organization and its external partners, “[t]echnology tools that promote interactions, such as wikis, virtual team environments, and videoconferencing, will enhance managerial innovations—smarter and faster ways for individuals and teams to create value through interactions…” For most social change initiatives that are leanly staffed with personnel who are more mission-aligned than well-compensated, building a smarter, faster operational system will make it easier for them to do their jobs and to focus more on the actual work of social change and program delivery. This combination will also make an organization more attractive to funders, while creating an environment in which program and service delivery can thrive. A nonprofit organization can improve its staff’s productivity in the realm of program delivery while relieving staff members of some of the day-to-day pressures that come along with working in the nonprofit sector, by investing in interactive technologies and the training to have staff and stakeholders adopt and use them.
1. Distributing co-creation
2. Using consumers as innovators
3. Tapping into a world of talent
4. Extracting more value from interactions
The article recommends that businesses should proactively shape these trends to increase wealth and economic value by using internet-based technologies, and social networking and communications tools. The authors recognize that technology alone can't unlock value, but must be combined with a new way of doing business, the most relevant of which is to foster "co-creation networks."
In the face of the current financial crisis, the tightness of funding to the third sector (which is already stretched for dollars and paid talent) makes it necessary for social change initiatives to create new economical and effective ways of “doing business,” and to be creative and aggressive in minimizing their cash outlay while maximizing their reach and building their audience. But while funding may be low, the social and political will to be engaged and “do good” is strong and continuously growing. (Paul Hawken’s writing on that in Blessed Unrest describes the networks arising from this will to improve societal conditions.) Combine the available technologies with the existing will to do good and business model innovation, and the trends outlined above might be adapted for third sector initiatives to increase return on social change initiatives. Here’s a brief description of how the trends might apply:
1. Distributing co-creation and 2. Using consumers (or, “beneficiaries”) as innovators
Just as corporations have started to harness marketing techniques to inspire product and service innovations from the collaboration between in-house developers and external stakeholders, so too can a social change initiative work with its stakeholders to encourage or solicit innovations in program or service delivery, raising awareness and inspiring action. The first two trends deal with building a co-creation network (and relate to the August 4th post below regarding transmedia storytelling).
The McKinsey Quarterly article notes that the Internet has become a “widespread platform for interaction, communication, and activism. Consumers increasingly want to engage online with one another and with organizations of all kinds.” The Internet and related Web 2.0 technologies have opened up new and cost-effective ways for social change initiatives to communicate with their base to raise awareness and inspire action. You only have to look at the number of causes and groups on Facebook, Twitter and similar sites to see the burst of social networking activity by third sector initiatives. Accessing stakeholders and beneficiaries to foster a co-creation network requires a similar technological effort—and has the added benefit of expanding the engaged audience and moving them from awareness to action. (There is another potential benefit in terms of fundraising organizations, in that engaged audiences are more likely to donate money; an engaged stakeholder is more likely to donate in kind, as well.)
External partners can offer objectivity, knowledge of market trends and insights on the ground—particularly in locations remote from a nonprofit’s corporate office—that can help shape program development and allow nonprofits to delegate and decentralize innovation (and, depending on the structure of the relationship, lessen costs). Companies that involve customers in design, testing and marketing get better insights into customer needs and behavior. Similarly, social change initiatives that involve their stakeholders and their beneficiaries in program design, testing and marketing can inspire “loyalty” and adherence to mission and vision, speed up development cycles and improve accountability. Keystone provides a good example of employing co-creation to work with its beneficiaries in South Africa and the Philippines (where it has ground staff, as well) to create and implement programs that enhance organizational efficacy. Keystone also works with like-minded organizations in strategic collaborative partnerships that have agreed to support testing and application of the model.
There is one caution here, also inspired by the article. In opening up innovation to stakeholders and beneficiaries, you must be sure that you are not overly swayed by “information gleaned from a vocal minority,” and also that you continue to pay attention to both short- and long-range needs of your organization and beneficiaries.
3. Tapping into a world of talent and 4. Extracting more value from interactions
The third and fourth trends allow for more effective work flow, both internally and externally to an organization. In terms of tapping into external talent, interactive technologies allow cost-effective outsourcing to specialists, consultants and independent contractors. “As more and more sophisticated work takes place interactively online and new collaboration and communications tools emerge, companies can outsource increasingly specialized aspects of their work and still maintain organizational coherence.” This could be especially useful to nonprofit organizations, no matter what size, but particularly for small- to mid-range organizations. Because of the problem of financing—and despite what I can see as an increasing number of conversations about the need for more foundation and donor funding to support administrative activities—nonprofit organizations are more stretched than ever. Nonprofit staff members often wear more than one administrative hat to keep within budget. I’m not certain how many nonprofits outsource or off-shore their administrative activities—or even how many create partnerships with other nonprofits to share back office or program/service delivery functions—but since interactive technologies are making it easier and less costly to integrate and manage the work of outsiders, a number of functions (including innovation as described above, and administrative tasks, such as finance, IT or operations) can be outsourced here or abroad by nonprofit organizations.
Relative to enhancing communications within an organization, or between an organization and its external partners, “[t]echnology tools that promote interactions, such as wikis, virtual team environments, and videoconferencing, will enhance managerial innovations—smarter and faster ways for individuals and teams to create value through interactions…” For most social change initiatives that are leanly staffed with personnel who are more mission-aligned than well-compensated, building a smarter, faster operational system will make it easier for them to do their jobs and to focus more on the actual work of social change and program delivery. This combination will also make an organization more attractive to funders, while creating an environment in which program and service delivery can thrive. A nonprofit organization can improve its staff’s productivity in the realm of program delivery while relieving staff members of some of the day-to-day pressures that come along with working in the nonprofit sector, by investing in interactive technologies and the training to have staff and stakeholders adopt and use them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)