Social Media Minefield

To start this on the right foot I should disclose that I am an absolute advocate of Social Media.  I think it is a great place to add value to your industry and receive invaluable feedback from your peers.  I have met people through groups from across the planet whose opinions I honor and whose insights are irreplaceable.  I have also belonged to groups that never get the idea that none of us are as smart as all of us.  They are stuck on self centered blathering or inconsequential announcements.

I personally believe that membership to any group has its responsibilities.  Participate or leave.  Add value of Adiós.  With all that being said I would like to share an experience from this morning.  It was another example of the importance of transparency for Nonprofits and an issue that you might choose to share with your board and volunteers. It begins with a story.

ONCE UPON A TIME..

A question had been posted to one of the nonprofit groups I belong to by a very bright gentleman. I was surprised that in a month no one had chosen to comment on this extremely relevant request so I added my two cents.

Today I was going to use that group to demonstrate the difference between communication and conversation. Much to my dismay I did not see my comments even though they had been submitted a week ago. Upon checking my pending posts for this group I found 16. I had assumed the group had little interest in my ideas but in reality they had never been posted.

The lessons for Nonprofits (and every business) are endless.

1. How many employees contribute ideas that never get posted, considered, or conveyed?

2. Of those that do make it through the minefield of territoriality how many receive a response?

3. Of those responses how many come in the form of a caring conversation instead of impersonal communication?

4. How do you KNOW?

I enjoy having my ideas debated and disagreed with but I dislike being treated dismissively.  That may not have been the case in the experience above.  The “kid” who was managing the group may have been over his “voluntary head” but my perception is that I was being treated disrespectfully.  Now that group has converted an active, interested and highly skilled volunteer into a disinterested, dissatisfied, dissident.

HOW DOES THIS EXAMPLE APPLY TO YOUR NONPROFIT?

We have been in the nonprofit management and consulting business for 16 years. Recently we acquired a new client and the commensurate trials of transition. Every day we are required to “turn around” a dissatisfied member because of the lack of responsiveness they have received in the past. Some many have been because of the previous administrators aptitude or attitude, other’s had been assigned to volunteers who may not have been able to make time to fulfill their commitments. Regardless of the cause these callers are understandably unhappy. Fortunately one of our greatest gifts is our ability to turn even the most disillusioned stakeholder into an inspired advocate.

THE CAVEAT TO THIS CREATIVE CAPACITY

Is that we need the time to switch from administrative doing to invaluable interacting. The neural networks required for the different processes are anti-correlated. Doing “left brain” sequential activities effectively shuts down the right brain’s creative capacity. (The HBR article Big Brain Theory actually has identified four anti-correlated networks if you are interested in the neuroscience).

We are all too busy.  The question is are we focused on conversation or communication?

This is not a problem of people but process and is the same issue assailing associations daily. The typical solution is in adding more controls which only exacerbates the problems. The solutions are found in transparency and metrics all contained in systems that are:

• Simple

• Scalable

• Secure

• Mobile

• Measureable

• Public and private

• Instant and everlasting

• Driven by policies instead of personalities.

If these processes had been in place for the group I spoke of in the beginning of this message the number of pending submissions would have been transparent to all board members. The metrics themselves would provide the reinforcement instead of an individual interaction (inevitably avoided) that is predictably perceived as a personal attack instead of meaningful mentoring.

So my three final questions to you are:

1. How important is responsiveness in your service to the industry and your members?

2. If you have a LinkedIn group how many posts are currently pending?

3. How much time each month is currently spent by association executives or staff processing information that could be reduced drastically by appropriate automation?

I appreciate you taking your valuable time to read this. I know you are busy but I hope you will receive this message as an invitation to join in engaging conversation instead of an intrusion of impersonal communication.

Your partner in Peer Powered Progress.

Randy