Crafting Your Social Media Strategy: Tips from Victor Garcia

Whether your non-profit organization is large or small, social media marketing is a must. Just about everyone is on social media in some way, shape or form — whether it's viewing YouTube videos, sending the 140 character Tweet or posting the photo of their favorite food on Instagram.  Social media marketing includes not only sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, but Pinterest, LinkedIn and many, many more — too many to mention in a single article. The medium can no longer be ignored. Ignoring social media is equal to ignoring potential outreach and assistance avenues which ultimately lead to donations to help your organization's cause.

So what's an organization to do to get started on social media? Social media can seem like an overwhelming maze of information to newbies and experts alike. What to post when? Where to post it? Do I post the same content on multiple channels?

The first thing an organization must do is identify the networks where your donors and benefactors reside. Facebook is an obvious choice, as the majority of people tend to be on Facebook. The majority, though, may not necessary represent the majority of people who are involved with or sympathize with your organization's cause.  An organization can get a picture of their social media landscape either through email surveys or, better yet, word of mouth — simply ask at a major event or gathering.  Also, it is beneficial to perform searches on the major social networks to see where your organization's name may be popping up.

Make social media fun. Like any medium, no one likes dull and boring. If your organization is holding an event or fundraiser, encourage people to post to their social media channels using a predetermined #hashtag. Have someone at events and fundraisers, even if they are performing other duties as well, dedicated to social media. Live Tweet the event and share photos on Facebook. Let attendees know the event will be on social media. Most will likely go to your pages looking for photos of themselves to share. One of the primary rules of social media is go easy on the traditional marketing. Most folks on social media do not go there for information that is blatant marketing. I always say at least 70/30, 70 percent engagement, 30 percent marketing. Find topics that allow you to inherently promote your organization without making it blatantly obvious.

Management of social networks can be a tedious task. Thankfully, there are tools out there such as Hootsuite, SproutSocial and many others that allow companies and organizations alike to see snapshots of most of their major social networks at any given time for a nominal fee. These tools are not only good for management of social networks, but for important analytical data that allows you to build on your social networks.

Above all, use common sense when using social media. Post things that are fun and relevant to your cause without being outlandish. It's important to keep it real and build trust on social media.
Still have questions?  There are many social media specific organizations out there, such as Social Media Club to assist you in your journey to social media success.

You can find me on Twitter at @educationnews1.




Victor Garcia has more than eight-years of experience in communications as a journalist for Gannett newspapers and in various marketing roles. He is currently the Social Media Coordinator for a global industrial automation company based in Bakersfield, Calif. Garcia is also a board member of Social Media Club Los Angeles.

 

Leading by Example: An Open Letter of Appreciation to the Golden Gate Chapter

While at the International Conference four years ago, a group of Conference attendees, led by Jim McBride of our chapter, saw the need to provide opportunities for people from diverse communities to come to the conference.  From that small gathering of conference attendees, a small fundraising movement was born.  The first scholarships were awarded to people attending the 2012 conference.

AFP’s Diverse Communities program allows any group of 25 or more fundraisers to identify as a community—and if that community grows to 100 or more members, a scholarship can be designated to members of that community.  To date, there are seven identified communities: African-American, Asian, Faith-based, Hispanic, Jewish, LGBT, and Rural.  Scholarships awards are $1,500, and 12 terrific fundraising professionals will be joining us in San Antonio because of these scholarships--including our own Jon Gilgoff, Founder and Director of Brothers on the Rise, and a member of the Golden Gate Chapter.

The Golden Gate Chapter has been a beacon of leadership and commitment to helping diversify the fundraising profession.  Last year, the Chapter was the only Chapter in the world to provide a named scholarship.  And just a little over two months into 2014, the Chapter has already secured the needed pledges to provide two scholarships to the 2015 conference.  This would be exemplary by itself — and Chapter members should be proud of this accomplishment — but the story runs deeper. 

Like many AFP Chapters, Golden Gate’s finances are ok, but not robust.  So, last year’s board committed to do a scholarship without expending chapter funds.  They passed a hat among themselves to fund the scholarship on behalf of the Chapter!

All of us should be proud of this Chapter accomplishment — and grateful to the board members who made this happen, through their personal generosity, in our name.  Please join me in thanking each and every one of them — and for the continuing and growing leadership they have shown this year.  We are in their debt for their generosity and leadership.  They have set the example for the entire AFP — and worldwide fundraising — community.

Sincerely,
David S. Disend
Golden Gate Chapter Member
AFP International Board Member
Chair, Diverse Communities Scholarships Task Force

Making the “Ask”: Advice from Connie Pheiff

The Art of the Ask is actually quite simple: 

• You make your ask
• You make your case
• You show the benefits
• Then you stop talking 

Many people wonder why I suggest making the ask first. “Asking” is a science. Not rocket-science, but a science. They can’t say ‘yes’ unless you ask. You are offering them an opportunity to contribute significantly to your community. People give to people they know like and trust. Forty percent of your time should be on building rapport and trust. Only ten percent of your tie will be getting the commitment.
Before reaching out to a potential donor you need to prepare. You will spend most of your time before and after the ‘ask.’ Don’t consume yourself with learning about your message, you should already know that. Spend your time learning about the potential donor. Their interest, giving history, what board do they sit on. The more you know, the quicker you can build a relationship. It’s a courtship… like dating. You can go online to Hoovers.com to learn more about a donor and a company.

As you prepare for your ‘ask’ meeting, create a list of bullets points about your organization. Have your current work plan with you just in case a question arises from the donor.

Collect testimonials from your current donors. Ask them to describe why they contribute their time and money to your organizations so you can demonstrate their commitment.

Determine who is the right person to make the ‘ask.’ It’s not always the staff member… in most cases it’s not the staff member. The ‘ask’ will be more sincere coming from one of your board members, someone that knows the potential donor. If your volunteer is not comfortable making the ‘ask’… ask them to make the call for you; make an appointment for you; suggest you both go the appointment together. They give their testimonial, then you make the ‘ask.’

In most cases the donor is a busy individual. If you got the meeting, they know why you are coming – to ‘ask.’ It is important to respect the donor's time and make the ask first. Then, and only then if the donor wants to know more information you are ready. Know your strategy before making the ask. You may only have one chance.

Remember when you are making an ‘ask’ it is about them. Not about your organization or how many people you serve. Individuals and corporations want to know what's in it for them.

A question to ask yourself: When you make the ‘ask’ do you allow a donor to feel good about him or herself?

~Connie Pheiff

Connie Pheiff is a noted nonprofit professional, speaker, and author. She has written the book The Art of the Ask, recently speaking on the subject at the Foundation Center in San Francisco.  You can find out more about her and her book through her website http://conniepheiffspeaks.com/.

Speaking Up for the Nonprofit Sector

A view from the trenches

There's a troubling trend in commentary on the nonprofit sector, exemplified by Josh Freedman's recent Forbes article on "Why the 'Nonprofit Sector' Needs to Go." There have been a number of exposés lately on the supposed ease by which all manner of organizations can acquire 501(c)3 status, with minimal oversight or supervision, such as "Anything Goes: Approval of Nonprofit Status by the IRS," by Rob Reich, Lacey Dorn, and Stefanie Sutton. The substance of such attacks is that too many nonprofit organizations are spending too much on themselves, and too little on fulfilling their stated mission. 

Freedman makes it easy for himself by focusing his argument on wealthy institutions such as certain hospitals and universities, specifically Harvard (those of us in the Bay Area can easily bring our own local examples to mind), questioning whether these are charitable, or "charitable," organizations (imagine the word spoken with two fingers making sarcastic quote marks in the air). Harvard, says Freedman, is "really rich, with billions of dollars in its endowment and billions of dollars of property, all of which are untaxed regardless of what they're for." Most of its students, he claims, also fall into the "really rich" category (it's perhaps ironic that Reich, Dorn and Sutton's 2009 study stems from Stanford’s Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society). 

By focusing exclusively on such institutions, it seems that he disregards ordinary nonprofits that do not by any stretch of the imagination fall into the "really rich" category. But let's be clear: if you think that Freedman is only talking about wealthy institutions, he qualifies this with: "Replace either of those words ('hospital' or 'university') with 'pretty much any nonprofit' and it would still apply." In other words, in Freedman's argument, all nonprofits engage in activities that do not further the cause that they support. 

There are certainly examples of organizations whose definition of what is "charitable" seems extremely loose. The Agitator’s Tom Belford notes that "it might surprise you to learn that the PGA Tour is a nonprofit business league (501(c)6, like the National Football League and the National Hockey League) and many of the tour's tournaments are set up as individual 501(c)3 charities. Of course, the benefit of charitable status for these sports charities is tax avoidance … hundreds of millions of dollars." 

These claims for nonprofit status are certainly a stretch, making it easy to see why Freedman argues as he does. Not taxing certain activities comes with societal costs, he claims, and creates a false distinction between nonprofit and for-profit sectors. "The primary goal of nonprofits is often to make more money, which serves to boost their status and thus bring in more money in a perpetual cycle."

But comparing Harvard or the NFL to your local chapter of the Boys' and Girls' Club of America is hardly comparing like with like. Freedman's beef, to be fair, is not with charity per se, but he believes that pretty much all nonprofits, rich or poor, engage in activities, some of which serve a charitable purpose, some of which do not. He argues that only those activities that provide direct support to the mission should be given nonprofit status.

But where do we draw the line? When I turn on the lights at my nonprofit in order to do my job, is that a "charitable" activity? Nonprofits need staff, resources and infrastructure as much as for-profits to meet their objectives. Freedman’s article bumps up against activist and fundraiser Dan Pallotta’s recent widely-publicized insistence on the contrary argument: "Too many nonprofits," he says, "are rewarded for how little they spend – not for what they get done." The insistent focus in too many nonprofits with limited funds on minimizing overhead—forming what Pallotta, unlike Freedman, thinks is a false distinction between charitable and non-charitable activities—limits what we can accomplish. Pallotta asks us to "start rewarding charities for their big goals and big accomplishments (even if that comes with big expenses)."

Shannon Foucault, Campaign Manager at Oakland Zoo, thinks Freedman’s article does provide food for thought: "What I grasp onto is that the general public has no idea what we actually do, why colleges and hospitals are nonprofit despite massive endowments and high fees, and how we are separate from the work government does (and why government helps to fund our work). What I am hearing over and over again is the need to improve our communications and public relations, for the whole sector."

Think about it. What work does your organization do that is not "important to your ultimate charitable mission?" And how can we as an industry help our donors understand that we have to engage in the full range of activities of any business in order to be effective at what we do? 

Pallotta's TED talk "The way we think about charity is dead wrong" tried to begin this outreach, though his views may not have circulated much outside the nonprofit sector itself. Obviously there is work to be done here – voices from within the sector speaking up when articles such as Freedman’s emerge. 

Foucault agrees. "As it is, charitable organizations are held so tightly accountable for how money is spent—especially on leadership and administration—that nonprofits can't recruit the talent needed to produce the changes society wants to see." And Barbara Stevenson, of Lumenos LLC, sees Freedman’s argument as "a thread in a larger conversation that I find alarming – in which many voices seem to be saying that the nonprofit sector has to go because businesses will do a better job." 

The argument, in other words, is going round in circles: nonprofits should be treated like businesses by taking away their tax-exempt status, while at the same time being punished for acting like businesses by having high ambitions that involve big expenditure.


About the author
Andrew Alvarez is Digital Fundraising Specialist at KQED, and serves on AFP Golden Gate's Marketing and Communications Committee.