The Bamboo Project Blog

Wiki-olio Anyone?

Beth Kanter is musing on her increased use of wikitations--wikis as presentation tools that either replace or build upon a PowerPoint presentation--and suggests that a wiki might also be a great place for her to keep an online portfolio. (I'm suggesting we call it a "wiki-olio" but I'm open to other suggestions).

Personally I think that a Wiki-based portfolio is a fabulous idea, particularly as I've been doing a lot of thinking about a professional development project I'm working on for one of my clients. (I also see this idea building off of some of my earlier thinking about building nonprofit skill networks.)

From an organizational perspective, having staff maintain an online portfolio with links to their work and presentations, resume information, etc. would be an outstanding resource. And for individuals, it would be a great way to keep an ongoing library of their work and skill development to be used throughout their careers. I don't know about you, but I've often forgot about projects I've worked on, trainings and presentations I've developed. If I got into the habit of maintaining a wiki-based portfolio, I'd have all of my work in one place.

For such a thing to work for organizations, I think that there would have to be an agreed-upon format and tagging taxonomy that all participants would use. The tags could cover skills, job functions, presentations/conferences, interests, work experiences, etc. It would make it much easier to find people who had a certain background or skill, particularly in larger organizations.

Definitely something I want to ponder further. I'd be curious to hear if anyone has created their own "wiki-olio" and what suggestions they have for organizing the materials, showcasing talents, etc.

From Blog to Blidget

So Widgetbox continues to make good on their promise to "widgetize the web," with their latest Typepad Bling, which allows you to turn your blog into a widget--or "blidget." Get it?

Pretty simple to do. I cut and pasted my blog URL and was given a few options to customize the appearance of my widget. Then I was told to log into my Widgetbox account or create a new one and Widgetbox created my widget. Once that was done, I was then given the option to promote it by installing the button above. (Go ahead and click on it--you can "blidget" me to your blog if you want).

I wanted to see how the installation process worked, so I actually installed my own blidget on my site, which you can see if you scroll down and look at the left sidebar. Kind of weird to promote myself on my site, I know, but since I only had my own widget, that was the only way to test it. (If someone else creates a blidget, let me know so I can install yours as an example so I don't seem so self-absorbed).

The installation process was actually even easier than creating the blidget.  I just had to select the interface for where I wanted to install the blidget (i.e., Typepad, Blogger, MySpace, Friendster, etc.) and then select the blog. Really a one-click process.

Now while this is a pretty cool little thing, I must admit that I'm trying to decide how a nonprofit might want to use it. Usually I'm decent at coming up with options, but today it's just not happening. So any ideas on how this could be useful? Or is it just a nice little gadget?

When E-Mail Is a Bad Idea

Dave Pollard gets specific about 10 scenarios where you should NOT use e-mail to communicate:

1. To communicate bad news, complaints or criticism
2. When you are seeking information that is not simple and straight-forward
3. When you are seeking approval on something that is involved or controversial
4. When you're sending a few people complicated instructions
5. When you are asking for comments on a long document
6. To request information from a group on a recurring basis
7. To convey instructions to a large number of people
8. To convey instructions to a large number of people
9. To explore a subject or idea
10. To send news, interesting documents, links, policies, directory updates and other 'FYI' stuff

I particularly subscribe to Dave's last item. I'm in the process of managing a few projects right now and I'm trying to get people to shift from the e-mail approach to using wikis and blogs to share this kind of information so that it's readily available to everyone in the group. It's a slow, painful process, though.

Thanks, Dave, for making things clearer.

Nonprofit Web Design Tips from Vince Flanders

Vince Flanders of "Web Pages that Suck" fame has a site devoted entirely to making sure that nonprofit web pages and other electronic communications don't suck. Check out his four-part series, "Is My Website Ineffective?," which includes some nice checklists to guide you through the process of analyzing your site and diagnosing problem areas.

You may also want to check out Designing Inward Out, a public diary of a nonprofit's work on redesigning their site. (Thanks to Allen for the tip).

IRS Training Modules Online

The IRS has put several interactive training modules online for nonprofit organizations. Topics include:

• Maintaining tax exempt status
• Unrelated business income
• Employment issues
• Form 990
• Required disclosures

Web 2.0--The Separation of Form and Content and What that Means for Us

Kansas State University cultural anthropologist Michael Wesch has developed a nice video introduction to Web 2.0 in terms of how it's fundamentally changed our relationship to online information, forcing us to re-examine a few things:

• we’ll need to rethink copyright
• we’ll need to rethink authorship
• we’ll need to rethink identity
• we’ll need to rethink ethics
• we’ll need to rethink aesthetics
• we’ll need to rethink rhetoric
• we’ll need to rethink governance
• we’ll need to rethink privacy
• we’ll need to rethink commerce
• we’ll need to rethink love
• we’ll need to rethink family
• we’ll need to rethink ourselves

You have to watch the video to see how its form better explains the Web 2.0 phenomenon. Hypnotic and fascinating. (Via Idea City ).

Also check out Beth Kanter's recent post on Dion Hinchcliffe's views of the differences between traditional and social media. Dion's ground rules dovetail nicely with Michael's video.

You're Going to have to Participate in the Conversation Whether You Want to or Not

Seems like conversations are going to happen whether we like it or not . . .

Earlier this week, I mentioned the New Zealand CYFSWatch blog that's raised an international ruckus because of its "name and shame" tactics, taking transparency and accountability to new levels. Since I made that post my traffic from searches fort that blog has increased significantly, adding further fuel to the fires of concern that the online community WILL get the word out, whether you want to participate in the conversation or not.

On a related note, Deborah Finn points out that there are an increasing number of blogs "taking aim" at the nonproft sector, particularly the technology practitioners. While she values the transparency and accountability encouraged by the new breed of blogs, she also pleads for a civil dialogue.

Finally, the Berkley GovBlog reports on a Booz Allen study published in a recent issue of CIO:

• Web 2.0 relevance cuts across gender and age. Forty-one percent of U.S. MySpace users are older than 35. That number was 35 percent for the United Kingdom and 29 percent for Germany.
• Web 2.0 users have few privacy concerns. Sixty-four percent of U.S. messages are freely available to the public. U.K. respondents reported that number as 61 percent, while Germany reported 73 percent.
• Web 2.0 capitalizes on ubiquitous connectivity. Approximately one-quarter of surveyed MySpace users are accessing MySpace from a laptop, a school or office computer, an Internet-enabled cafe or a BlackBerry.
• Web 2.0 communities influence opinions and purchasing decisions. Thirty-nine percent of surveyed MySpace users receive product picks from virtual peers.

The study concludes that Web 2.0 is profoundly shaping consumer behaviors and expectations and that it has reached "critical mass. Businesses that don't respond may be placing themselves at risk. "

It's going to be interesting to see where this all lands for nonprofits . . .

New Zealand CYFS Blog Causing Furor

What's going on with a "name and shame" New Zealand blog is raising some interesting questions about the power of blogs and what to do when they're negatively directed at an organization.

The CYFSWatch Blog was started by a man whose daughter was poorly treated last year by Child, Youth and Family Services staff as she tried to give her baby up for adoption. His mission:

This blogsite is dedicated to all those people who have been bullied, intimidated, or "familially raped" by the Department of Child Youth, & Family: people, it's time to get your power back. Please email any and all "name and shame" stories to [email protected], and we will publish them - uncensored. Photos of any and all offending parties are welcome, together with private and public addresses, contact details, car registrations, etc. Your anonimity is guaranteed (unless you choose to publish under your own name) - theirs is not!

Posts on the site are brutal--naming names, describing case workers in some pretty extreme terms (" . . . a troll of a woman . . . a CYFS feminazi par excellence"). They have also promised to post photos and home addresses of the staff they are shaming. Clearly these are people who are furiously angry and have decided to take matters into their own hands. 

The blog might have remained only a tiny corner of the blogosphere, unknown to most people, if the head of the CYFS hadn't found out about it and gone public in a big way, vowing to do everything within his power to get the site down. This naturally blew traffic to the blog out the door as the story hit the papers and readers wanted to find out what was being said that was so bad it required the blog to be censored.

Currently a battle is raging in New Zealand and in the blogosphere between those who want the blog taken down and those who believe that censoring it is a blow against freedom of expression.  Some are even arguing that this supports the position that bloggers and the folks who comment on their sites should not be allowed anonymity on the Web.

The  situation raises some interesting issues for nonprofits and government agencies, which often work hand-in-hand with them.

First, while companies have been dealing for a few years now with bloggers setting up sites specifically to collect negative commentary about their products or services, this is the first situation I've seen where something similar is being directed at a government agency. Like it or not, the Internet makes it easy for someone to criticize your organization and to gain a much wider audience for that criticism than ever before.

Second, the CYFS strategy for handling the situation clearly backfired. Taking it public only drove more traffic to the blog. Most people would never have heard of the site if it hadn't blown up in the media. Now the blog has become a cause celebre for freedom of speech in the blogosphere.

It has also raised the issue of transparency. Many are suggesting that if the allegations on the blog are true, than the blogger is right in holding an organization accountable for its bad behavior, no matter how "extreme" the rhetoric. I wonder how many angry people who have been poorly treated will read about this case and want to see something similar happening in their own communities? How will the objects of their ire handle it?

These are all issues that nonprofits will increasingly need to struggle with and address. The for-profit world has had to devise strategies for managing their on-line reputations. Now it looks like nonprofits and government agencies will need to do the same.

I personally don't think that this is a bad thing. I support transparency and believe that organizations should be held accountable for what they do and how they manage. In my years in the nonprofit and government world, I've seen a lot of mismanagement and waste in the name of doing good. I've always worked to bring change from within but in many cases have found that unless there's outside pressure to change, it just isn't going to happen. With sites like the CYFSWatch on the horizon, looks like some people will be taking matters into their own hands and that organizations will have to figure out what they're going to do to deal with that.

Michele

Creating Nonprofit Skill Networks

Lately I've been exploring the concepts of nonprofit networks here, what it takes to form and nurture connections among various nonprofits and between nonprofits and individuals. We've talked about building connectivity networks that link people to people, affinity networks that reinforce commonalities among network members and production networks that move affinities into collective action.

The other day I was researching learning management systems for a client interested in tracking staff competences and training needs. I started thinking about the need for skill networks within the nonprofit community and what would have to happen in order for us to develop such networks.

What Do I Mean by a Nonprofit Skill Network?
Very simply, a nonprofit skill network would bring together the knowledge and skills of individual staff at all member organizations and make those skills available to the members of the network. For example, a staff person at Agency A might have skills in developing organizational newsletters. This skill would be cataloged in an online location--either a database or in some other form, such as through a wiki using tagging. When Agency B needs someone to do a newsletter for them, but they lack the internal skills for this to happen, then they would be able to find the staff person from Agency A who could then assist them in implementing that project. 

Why Do We Need Nonprofit Skill Networks?
Staff knowledge and skills are the lifeblood of any organization, but this is particularly true for nonprofits. The more skilled our staff are, the more access to good information they have, the more likely we are to be successful. But many nonprofits are small. They don't have the capacity within their individual organizations to cover all the skill needs that may be necessary to create an effective organization. This is particularly the case when we venture outside of traditional program areas into more functional skills, for example, IT, human resources, marketing and public relations, staff training etc.

With the creation of a skill network, member organizations would be able to expand their capacity to access particular knowledge and skills. In some cases, I could see organizations sharing a collective pool of staff. For example, Agency A might employ a marketing person who splits her time between several members of the network. Network members who used the marketing person would either reimburse the employing agency for the staff person's time or they could trade for services, perhaps offering the use of their finance person in return.

Agencies would also be able to access specialized skills and knowledge for special projects. For example, if an organization needed to run a training on case management basics, they might be able to "borrow" a staff person from one of the other organizations to provide the training. Again, they could either pay for the use of the staff person's time or they could trade for other services.

How Would a Skill Network Operate?
The first order of business would be to find a way to catalog the knowledge, skills and abilities of staff from all network member organizations. The network members would need to agree on a common taxonomy for describing skills so that member organizations are comparing apples to apples.

Ideally, these skills would be cataloged in an online system, either a shared database or by using something less sophisticated, such as tagging. If tagging was used, I could see the creation of a network wiki or blog. For each staff person there would be a detailed biography and maybe a copy of their resume, work samples, etc. Their entries would also be tagged with the appropriate knowledge and functions. Interested agencies would then be able to access the biographies by looking under the appropriate tags.

Other issues that would need to be addressed by the network would include:

• Processes and procedures for collecting the information from staff, including what information will be collected and how it will be shared.

• Will participation in the skill network be voluntary or required for individual staff?

• Processes for accessing staff from other agencies to work on various projects

• Acceptable exchanges--will trading be allowed or would it be strictly a financial arrangement? How will the organizations handle the financial side of things?

• Who will be responsible for maintaining and updating the skill database?

Cons of a Skill Network
There would be a number of challenges to creating such a skill network, not the least of which would be getting past the often siloed, territorial thinking of many organizations. Clearly this would be a complicated endeavor with logistical and practical concerns galore. Many organizations might be uncomfortable with the idea of hiring a staff person in the hopes that they would be able to share that person with other agencies and be reimbursed for those costs. (One way around that would be to look into sharing freelance consultants who would not be employed by any single agency). For various reasons, individual staff might also object to providing their services to another nonprofit. And a significant number of nonprofits operate in crisis mode, making the idea of setting up a skill network a pipe dream they feel they have little time to pursue.

Pros of a Skill Network
For all the potential problems in setting up and maintaining a skill network, I think that there are also significant benefits that make it a worthwhile endeavor. Clearly it would expand the capacity of individual organizations to provide higher quality services. They would have access to knowledge and skills beyond their organization that could give their individual organization a new lease on life.

There's also a benefit to individual staff. In many cases, nonprofit staff get burned out from dealing with the same people and problems on a daily basis. The opportunity to provide services in their strength areas to other organizations could re-energize a tired career. They could also give staff an opportunity to stretch and grow in ways that would in turn benefit their employing organization.

Some Possible First Steps
When I'm thinking about possibilities, I tend to take them to the furthest degree. I see the end result, which can be overwhelming to a lot of people. I think there are smaller steps that organizations could take, however, to start moving in the direction of a larger skill network.

Create an Internal Skill Network--The technologies exist for individual organizations to create their own internal knowledge and skill networks. Using wikis and blogs, individual organizations could take it upon themselves to catalog their internal staff knowledge and skills to make this information available to others in the organization. I would suggest delving deeply into what staff know--you may be surprised at the skills that people have developed in other parts of their lives that could be utilized within the organization.

Create a Skill Network with 1-2 Trusted Partners--Most nonprofits have developed relationships with other organizations already. To expand outside of the individual organization, they could reach out to a few of their trusted partners to build a smaller shared network of skills. You may already be doing this on an informal basis. However, making it a somewhat more structured process could reap bigger benefits for all members of the network. It could also create some major value-add for grant applications.

I think that there are a lot of possibilities for this concept and I'd love to hear from you about your thoughts, if you've seen anything like this being developed anywhere, etc. E-mail me or leave me a note in comments.

Michele

QEDWiki May Bring Mash-ups to Your Neighborhood

Yesterday I shared a tool I'd found that could help me easily create a Google Maps mash-up. Now it looks like we may be able to add another tool to the toolbox.

To this point, creating a mash-up has been a task for a programmer, or at least someone with a fair amount of technology know-how. Mash-ups have generally been a little too complicated for the regular person to do on their own. But as Dion Hinchcliffe writes at ZDNet, IBM is getting ready to put the power to create simple web-based applications into the hands of non-techies, too.

QEDWiki, which is currently being tested by IBM's corporate customers, allows end users--managers, front-line staff--to create their own simple computer programs using a simple drag and drop interface. Users can pick the type of functionality they want--for example, they want to see addresses represented on a Google Map--and the data sources they want to draw from. Dion's screencast, for example, shows how he creates a simple wiki page that would allow people to enter addresses into a web page and then have those addresses represented in a Google Map. You can also watch the 5-minute demo above to see how an insurance claims adjuster could create a simple web app to tell her which claims to process and whether or not contact information is valid.

The implications of something like this are pretty interesting. In most organizations, front-line staff are dealing with a lot of inefficiencies and have created work-arounds to deal with those problems. As a staff trainer, I get to hear about many of these in my training sessions and I'm always amazed at the ingenuity of front-line staff to figure out ways to do their jobs better.

The problem that these staff face, though, is that their work-arounds are often "paper-based." To use technology in any way, they must rely on some centralized controlled process where IT personnel who often have little understanding of the ways in which front-line staff work are developing applications that may or may not really get the job done. With access to something like QEDWiki, staff would have in their possession the means to create their own computer applications on the fly. They would be also be able to share these applications with their co-workers, who could further tweak and improve the tool. A great way to expand organizational learning and efficiency.

I'm not naive enough to believe that this solution is just around the corner for nonprofits. There are many hurdles to overcome, including cost and providing staff with the context and skills to understand how they might be able to use such a tool. But I think that there's a lot of promise with a tool like QEDWiki because it has the potential to really improve the capacity of individual staff and organizations that use it. I also believe that QEDWiki is part of a larger trend to continue pushing into the hands of individual users the power to create tools and applications that work for them. To my mind, this could be a very good thing, although we will also need to consider all the ways in which it could impact our organizations.

Michele