May 2011

An Online Communications Rule of Thirds?

By Laura Quinn, May 31, 2011
Way back in 2008, I blogged about balancing your time and money between websites, email, and social media.  I hypothesized a rule of thirds:  that you should spend about a third of your energy and money on your website, a third on email communications, and a third on "online outreach".  Note that I say "money and energy" -- whether we're talking about time or money or both depends on the organization. You could hire a consultant to do it all -- which would then cost a lot but take little time on your part-- or you could do it all in house -- which would cost less but take a lot of time.
 
Is this "rule of thirds" still valid?  Stephen Blyth asked us this question on Facebook, provoking a lot of thought over here as to what we would recommend, and, in fact, what we do ourselves.  The decision was that we do indeed think it's still a useful rule of thumb, at least in thinking through what you're actually doing, and what you want to prioritize.  
 
To help you think it through, here's what it looks like here at Idealware:  
  • Website Communication:  The time we spend on our website varies a lot by what resources we have going out, but probably averages about one to two hours per week to update and add content (that doesn't include actually writing the articles, of course -- we spend way more time on those!).  We look at website analytics as a separate process -- maybe about two hours per month there.  We then plan on a small enhancement phase to create new features about a twice a year-- at maybe $1000 in consulting fees and maybe eight hours each time.  The website platform itself we use is free and open source.  So if we count our time over here as, say, $30/hour, that comes to about $5500 per year.  Wow, it adds up, huh?
  • Broadcast Email:  What about email?  There, we average about two hours a week in figuring out our email schedule, actually creating and sending emails, managing our list, checking stats to see what worked, etc.  Stephen in his question pointed out that organizations really ought to be doing testing and experimenting with email, as well as just sending them.  I agree... but we're not doing that much.  We really should be strateging different subject lines, trying a different format every once in while, and then tracking. So let's add in about 4 hours a month to do that.  Plus the actual cost of our broadcast email tool -- about $150/month for our volume of emails.  So that comes to about $6000, again counting our time at $30/hour.
  • Outline Outreach: And then there's online outreach.  For us, that primiarly means posting and trying to build community through Facebook, Twitter, general listening, and experimenting -- we spend 4 to 5 hours a week on that, but no money.  We're not doing anything with Google Ads, though I'd like to be (we're still waiting, hopefully, for a Google Grant).  I'm not sure how to account for our blog in this -- we use it as much to provide content towards our mission as to actually do outreach.  We probably spend about three hours a week on that, including staff posts -- let's say one of those hours goes to outreach. So that's about $8000, with our time at $30/hour.
 
So what does that come to?  Roughly 30% of our online communication resources to our website and our email communication, and then about 40% to our social media and online outreach.
 
Not too far from a rule of thirds... What does it look like for you?
 

What makes a nonprofit technology project successful?

By Marc Baizman, May 23, 2011

Secret KittyI've been working with a variety of nonprofits on different types of technology projects, and I think I'm getting better at "picking the winners" right out of the gate.  So I figured I'd let you all in on a few of the secrets that I've learned after doing this for about 8 years.  Here goes:

1) Make sure management is bought in to the project from the start.  This includes ED's, board members, senior staff, and anyone who could possibly throw a wrench into the process at a higher level. Obviously this isn't always possible, but recognizing that you might have to do an internal "sales pitch" is much easier up front than down the line when you're ready to go and someone holds up the process.

2) Make sure there is a defined budget for the project.  I can't tell you how many times I've heard, "We need to know how much it's going to cost, and then we'll find the money for it somehow."  The problem with that strategy is that you're going to need to fundraise or take money from other things to fund this project.  If you're not budgeting for technology, then you org has larger problems than just this single project.

3) Make sure there are at least 2 staff members who have "system administrator-level" knowledge.  More often than not, one person leaves over the duration of the project and since this is a "tech thing" you can bet the project was handed to the youngest staff member (since they "you know, use Facebook or something") who is either a VISTA or an intern returning to school in a few months).

 4) Make sure there is adequate training time for all staff members.  Often one of the last things to be considered, training is one of the most important ingredients to success of any nonprofit technology project.  Your new website may look totally mind blowing, but if no one can change any of the content ever, then it's not going to be super useful.  Your new donor management system is the bees knees, but if the development director can't find that one major donor with the last name that starts with "Czy", you're going to be in a tough spot.

What are some of your keys to succesful nonprofit technology projects?

 

Ask Idealware: Can You Tell Me About Idealware's Editing Process?

By Chris Bernard, May 18, 2011

Senior Editor Chris Bernard talks about the editing process Idealware uses to create articles and reports. 

When Perfect Is the Enemy of Excellent

By Johanna Bates, May 16, 2011

Perfect photo by Leo Reynolds

I came across this great post by Amanda Luker of the Drupal consulting firm Advomatic: Designing for Drupal: Dos and Don'ts. It describes some key principles that designers can use to ensure their designs are reasonably build-able in Drupal: "reuse, flexibility and standardization."

It was refreshing to see this post, because, yes, almost any design can be built in almost anything. But if you're on a budget, it can be costly to implement a design that isn't "CMS aware". Can I build that in Drupal? Yes, I almost always can. Is it always a great idea? If it doesn't leverage native Drupal features in a strategic way, and its complexity isn't serving an organizational mission goal, then it's not the best use of money or time. If the design cannot be built in a way that allows for growth, flexibility and evolution, it can even get in the way of more practical, strategic innovations down the road. So though your new site may look perfect on launch day, it might not be the most excellent website you could have built.

Everyone wants a usable site, and they want it to look great and stand out. All of this is possible in most widely-used open source content management systems, including Drupal. But you can't have everything. Most organizations must strike a balance (this reminds me of Michelle Murrain's great post about the cheap, fast and good triangle). I have a client right now whose mantra is "the perfect is the enemy of the good." I really think this is true, in life, and about website building. I'd go so far that the desire for perfection can get in the way of excellence. Awesome things can be accomplished on a budget with a well-balanced compromise between design and functionality, using mission as a filter to ensure the project is hitting its strategic goals. It might not be perfect, but it can be really, really excellent.

Donor Management Update!

By Jay Leslie, May 11, 2011

How could it already be May? Snowflakes have given way to pollen spores and I’m more than ready for Memorial Day and the unofficial start of summer; though I’m a bit disappointed to have spaced on catching the de-glaciation of the Idealware parking lot. Oh well. I’ve been busy!

We at Idealware are in the home stretch in the production of the second edition of our Low Cost Donor Management System report. Exciting times, as there are some systems in this report that were not in the first one.

Here’s the complete list of the systems we’ve reviewed:
 
  1. BasicFunder Premier
  2. CiviCRM
  3. Click & Pledge
  4. Common Ground
  5. DenariOnline
  6. DONATION
  7. DonorPerfect (installed Basic)
  8. DonorPerfect (installed Premier)
  9. DonorPerfect (online Basic)
  10. DonorPerfect (online Premier)
  11. DonorPro
  12. DonorSnap.Com
  13. DonorTools
  14. eTapestry
  15. Exceed! Basic
  16. Exceed! Premier
  17. FastFund Raising
  18. FundRaiser Select
  19. GiftWorks (Premium)
  20. GiftWorks (Standard)
  21. Income Manager
  22. Little Green Light
  23. MatchMaker FundRaising Software Enterprise Edition
  24. MatchMaker FundRaising Software Standard Edition
  25. NEON
  26. NetSuite Do Good Better Fundraising
  27. PatronManager
  28. ResultsPlus
  29. Sage Fundraising 50
  30. Salesforce Foundation's Nonprofit Starter Pack
  31. SalsaLabs
  32. Sumac
  33. The Databank
  34. Total Info
 
 
If you’re a consultant who works on one of these systems, you might want to consider a listing in the consultants directory of this report, as it’s sure to find its way into the hands of nonprofit decision makers who are in the market for donor management systems. To find out how, visit the link at the bottom of this post.
 

Nothing for Nothing: Kickstarter vs. IndieGoGo

By Kyle Andrei, May 10, 2011

Crowd-sourced fundraising sites have been getting a lot of attention recently: we hear success stories about organizations putting up projects on these online tools, and spreading the call for funding through their networks, friends, and their friends' networks. There are two main tools out there, which are nominally similar, except for a single, important detail.

First up is Kickstarter, which we’ve previously talked about, a website to find funding for arts, music, video, and other creative projects. You post your project, along with your goal, and a timeframe, and the community pledges money. Typically the projects will offer little rewards or thank-you gifts to donors, depending on how much is pledged ($1, $10, $50, and so on). Projects link quickly to Facebook and Twitter, making it easy to bring your network of friends and supporters to the existing and very active Kickstarter community. It’s good that they’re active, because all Kickstarter projects are all-or-nothing.

That’s right, if your project doesn’t meet its goal by the deadline, you get zip. While being generally annoying, this policy does light a fire under your supporters to actually pledge, spread it to their friends, and maybe be a little more generous than they would otherwise be. The important trick to Kickstarter is to figure out what the bare minimum you need to fund your project, and post that as your goal, so you increase your chances of at least getting enough. If you aim too high, and your project doesn’t succeed, you’ll end up with no funding. Because the community is very active, and organizations like YouTube and Vimeo promote projects that meet certain criteria, it’s quite possible to exceed your goal. While free to use, Kickstarter will take 5% of what you raise if your project is successful.

Similar to Kickstarter is IndieGoGo; the main difference is that with IndieGoGo, you get to keep the money pledged if your project fails to meet its goal. While the all-or-nothing policy leads to motivation on Kickstarter, there’s something nice about getting any money as opposed to none. While both are arts-oriented, IndieGoGo seems more lax on what sort of people and projects are allowed. IndieGoGo charges a 4% fee if your project succeeds (if you don’t meet your goal, it rises to 9%).

How do you feel about this? Would you put in all the effort to set up a project, promote it, stress over it, and end up with nothing because you're a few dollars short of your goal? Or are you a gambler?

Anyone have any success/horror stories?

Ask Idealware: What are QR Codes?

By Andrea Berry, May 5, 2011

 In this week's Ask Idealware video, Laura Quinn answers the ever present question, "What are QR Codes?"  Watch Laura explain the mystery of those odd black and white boxes and a little about how nonprofits can use them effectively...

 Have other burning questions? Use the comment box to let us know what questions we should tackle next!

Just *Who* is Still Using IE6 Anyhow?

By Heather Gardner..., May 2, 2011

IE6 Countdown map

As I put the final touches on a "simple" one page website, I was met yet again with the all too familiar last step. Checking out how it looks in IE6. Yes, really. Still. And you probably already know the answer. Not good.

Which got me to thinking ...just who are the holdouts that are still using this browser that mangles their web experience and opens them up to all kinds of security issues.

This year the notorious browser will be 10 years old; I doubt anyone will be throwing IE6 a birthday party on August 27th. Some folks did already hold a funeral though. Ten years is a glacial epoch in web years and IE6 has become a symbol of all things bad and bassackwards in the web developer community. Browser stats can vary wildly, but right now according to IE6Countdown 11.6% of the world uses it and W3 Counter still registers 3.23% of the world looking at your website with IE6. So who are these people and why do they do it? Inquiring minds wanted to know. Here's what I found out.

The What

 First of all, I found that I was not alone in asking this question. And it looks like many businesses have been asking as well and seemlingly finding a very low ROI (return on investment).

Google, YouTube, Facebook and Amazon no longer worry about your experience if you are looking at their sites on Ye Olde Internet Explorer. And closer to home, Blackbaud and Salesforce agree. Many more large sites are following suit and more web developers are convincing clients that it just isn't worth the time and money required to get sites and applications to play nice with the browser.

And now even Microsoft wants it to stop. They nicely created a website mapping out the end of this painful era - the IE6 Countdown site mentioned above. It's part of their effort to get usage stats under 1% so they can get rid of their embarassing headache, even though the company has committed to continue support for the browser until Windows XP support runs out ... in 2014.

They are pretty serious about reducing usage though. Their 2010 upgrade campaign in Australia asked for people to rat out their IE6 using friends so they could convince them that using IE6 is like drinking 9 year old rotten milk by sending them actual rancid milk. That's pretty hardcore in my book.

The Who & the Where

If you check out IE6 Countdown apparently the answer to our core question lies in big companies like Intel and the countries of China, South Korea and surprisingly India and Japan. Millions of unhappy people locked into a browser not likely of their choice.

Over a third of Chinese (33.8%) and nearly a quarter of South Koreans (24.5%) still use IE6. India and Japan hover around 10% and Saudi Arabi is on their heels with 9.9%.

Government support may have something to do with it - the UK continues to support IE6, Australia, France and Germany don't. I read in the comments on one of the many sites to cover Micorsoftt's campaign that South Korea's government for example is said to have developed their infrastructure to heavily rely on Active X and the browser, making an upgrade very costly. As far as I can tell, the official word at the U.S. federal level is to go with IE8, but it seems many agencies are still using the outdated browser as well.

Although Intel is one of the most notable companies that until last year was still working on IE6, it is not alone. As recently as 2009 IE6 was the browser of choice (60%!) for Enterprise level businesses.

One fairly recent post on the business network LinkedIn's questions and answers section estimated total business usage of IE6 as the default browser at round 12% of all US companies, which partly explains the 2.9% of IE 6 users the USA on the countdown map. I suspect there are some nonprofit offices included there as well. 

The Why

Use of the old software is often tied to the use of old machines and other old software. Older hardware seems to be a big part of the reason in the high percentage of IE6 users in countries outside of the US. I was surprised about tech-savvy countries like Japan and India being in that group though. Another regional issue is the huge number of purportedly pirated versions of Windows XP software running throughout Asia, in which upgrades aren't possible.

If you run old versions of Windows like Windows 2000, upgrading to the new versions of IE isn't an option. If critical applications software was tailored to Window 98, or say, your intranet requires IE6, upgrading your operating system may not seem possible. So trying to upgrade the web browser creates a domino effect on the number of upgrades needed. Which adds cost as well as complexity, and likely leads to putting off the task again and again. Check out the comments on this post for more examples and insights.

The larger the organization/company, the bigger the problem becomes. While smaller businesses are shepherded along the upgrade path by buying retail, in bigger firms significant investment in new hardware and software takes place in 3-5 year cycles, so until Microsoft stops offering XP license extensions and major corporations need to switch to Windows 7, which doesn't support IE6, the problem will continue.

And then there are the external application dependencies. Software that is only compatible with this browser. IE6 came with its own now well-known eccentricities, so programming for its specific quirks became the norm. Many organizations have created whole suites of homegrown software, which don't include an upgrade path and would need re-written or replaced if users upgrade their browser.

So the main answer for businesses at least seems to be that existing options for migrating from IE 6 are too pricey & risky.

One other reason that came up in Why You Can't Pry IE6 Out of Their Cold Dead Hands is pretty sad - user control. Since business websites largely remain usable in IE6 but most of the distracting Web 2.0 and social sites fail, workers aren't likely to be updating their Facebook status from work if the company stays old school. This might be part of the slow adoption of new browsers in control conscious China as well.

Nonprofits face all these same challenges and some are probably still using IE6 for one of the reasons above. After all, they are also under severe budget constraints, often have older equipment and their IT staff, when they are lucky enough to have them, may also be intimidated by the cost and effort involved in an organization wide up-grade. So it seems likely that at least some of those statistics come from systemic nonprofit use.

I don't want to seem judgmental in case "you have a friend" still using IE6 or the problems of cost and reprogramming apply to your organization. So, why is it so important to carve out the budget and time to upgrade or swap browsers? Well those security issues are one big reason. And as with other upgrades, new more efficient software and workflows will be available once the switch has been made. Today's successful nonprofits need to be in the modern era, engaged in the social web and show topnotch efficiency for funders and donors. These are good reasons.

And well, even though I don't really believe that kittens will die if you use IE6, I know for a fact that switching will result in many fewer tears shed, curses hurled and hair lost by web developers around the world.

The How:

Web Users
If you aren't being compelled to use IE6 by your organization or company, just don't do it!

  • Get IE 9 or at least IE 8 (good if you are stuck on Windows XP) for free, now.
  • Maybe you'd like to try out Firefox or Google's Chrome?
  • Or one of the dozens of other options you have these days for web browsing technology.

 

IT Managers

 

Web Developers

  • If you just want to make sure your content is accessible, then get on board with the Universal IE6 stylesheet for plain vanilla sites with readable content.
  • If you simply must have a site look like an "OK" version of your design in IE6, then IE6 fixer is a good place to start. It catches many of the standard "gotchas" inherent to this browser. And you can get separate fixes for IE7 too.

What about your organization? Are you still using IE6? Do you want help to move on? If you let us know in the comments, I'm sure you will receive a lot of support, resources and advice to make the switch. Any real life experiences and additions also appreciated.