Public Relations Commentary

Increasingly, public relations pracititioners have to know not only how to write for the Web, but also how to manage and respond to blog postings. This blog was created to use in my public relations courses to help my students prepare to blog and learn how to respond to others in a virtual yet professional manner.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Creativity and nonprofit organizations.

Aside from our furry little cows and our leather peaches fiasco a few weeks ago, creativity has to play an important part of how nonprofits communicate and distinguish themselves from one another and even from for-profit and government entities. It's not just creative messaging, but also creative problem-solving and strategic planning.

So consider you're working in an organization that has been doing the same routine with its programs and/or services for years. You've got staff members who are comfortable in their jobs, and board members who are content with where things are going. But, you've been monitoring your organization's environment and see a new startup venture who is going to be competing for your clients, donors, and volunteers.

You have to make some creative changes to survive this challenge because of the competitors' innovative ideas and approaches. How are you going to convince your organization to do things differently?

posted by Richard @ 4:35 PM  

11 Comments:

  • At 10:01 PM, March 12, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Change is inevitable, but the question is how you will react to the change. Individuals as well as NPOs in this case have two options. They can either stay the same and realize that no improvement will take place, or they can take the risk and incorporative innovative ideas that can allow them to hopefully surge forward without forcing them to lose their main objectives.

    If I was working for an organization that was hesitant toward change, I would definitely make sure to ease them into the process. Change will happen but its something that probably won’t happen overnight. I think I would begin the idea of change with an initial meeting that involves everyone so we can all be on the same page. It would probably be a good idea to lay out some facts about where the organization is now and where we will be if we don’t implement change and where we will can be if we implement change.

    I would try and encourage change in a positive environment that would encourage them to be open minded. For instance we could meet in an informal setting that everyone has an interest in, like go to a football/baseball game and witness how the sport/ball fields have had to change but emphasize how change has been beneficial. Or have a dinner at our favorite restaurant and witness how they have changed through the years. Or visit the town hall and see its progress through time. But find some place/location that appeals to all of my staff and board members and let them witness first hand how change has been beneficial outside the organization. It will be important to ease them into the situation and not scare them off , so it they can visualize change in an area that they familiar with (sport, restaurant, building) then it might help them to take a step further and realize that they can accept change within their organization. I think meeting in a familiar or enjoyable place will provide a creative idea to bring about the idea of change.

    Once we establish that change can be positive, I will then make sure to emphasize what will change and what won’t change. Old technologies, outdated programs etc. will change, but our mission and original goals won’t change. Instead we will be implementing innovative tools to better achieve our goals.

    Lastly, I would make sure to involve my staff and board members in the change. I don’t want them to feel that their world is changing and they have no control. For instance we might offer workshops where everyone can be apart of learning about the new computers and make sure that everyone feels comfortable using them. And we can also create a contest or suggestion box that allows people to implement their own innovative ideas. So they can feel that they are having a positive influence on their organization. Maybe conducting a contest to see how can come up with the most innovative idea might be a creative ideas to get everyone involved with the change instead of changing them.

     

  • At 11:53 AM, March 13, 2008, Blogger Donald said…

    Sometimes it’s not the change that people fear but that change will bring about negative results or less positive results. Creativity doesn’t cost anything to sit around and do exercises like we have done to create a “new way of thinking”.

    In this situation, I would present my ideas for change with the threat of lost income. Getting financial statements about where our money comes from – individual donations – and the possible lost of a portion of that income to a competeing group is always a risk. Also showing how innovative ideas for new or different fundraisers can also open their eyes to the necessity of change.

    For example, our annual fund raising golf tournament has become less and less profitable over the past few years. The main reason is because our lead donor, a food distributor, would come and provide food (reduce expenses) and make a LARGE donation (added income). Well, we lost that sponsor, but none of our efforts changed. We had the same kind of fundraier, but had to spend more and made less money.

    We have one strong-willed Board Member stepping up this year and offering a new way to address our fund raising issue. He has offered a higher level of sponorship (going from our humble $3,000 level to $7,500) with more exclusive benefits and also throwing in the idea of a gambling Cacutta. In the past we have just offered cheap trophies and prizes like golf balls and visors to the winning teams. Our innovative Board Member is offering the idea to allow onlookers to bet on the winners, and the organization would receive a portion of the pool – think NC Education Lottery.

    And honestly, bringing ideas to the table like gampling and more than doubleing the sponsorhsip level for our tournament seems an extreme step for what we have comfortably done in the past. But analyzing the risk of this attempt v. hosting an event that is time-consuming and not rewarding for the organization is a way to present the idea to be accepted. When it comes to change what is demanded more than money is effort. If staff or Board Members or volunteers put in extra effort for change, then the consequences are not as severe.

     

  • At 6:09 PM, March 15, 2008, Blogger Brittney Mills said…

    My response for this question kind of goes along with the approach that I took in the previous question. My theory is that if you get the facts together and present them in a personal and meaningful way everyone will want to make the changes necessary, especially in an NPO where people are committed to continued support of a cause.

    I also think that the key is to create a positive environment as Anna suggested, yet keeping the environment realistic is also important. A positive, realistic environment would be one in which everyone has an understanding of the need for change and one in which there is kind of a bandwagon thing going on where everyone wants to get involved to stay competitive. You also want to foster a sense of urgency because you don’t want to take the risk of enacting creative changes too late (or never) and losing volunteers, donations, clients, or even good employees.

    When it comes down to it, most people involved with your NPO are going to be passionate (or at very least mildly interested) about seeing it prosper. So, if you present to them that there is competition on the block threatening their organization and that they either have to change or close (basically), then they will want to change. It’s all about encouraging people to want to change and to do so in a unified effort for the good of the organization.

     

  • At 8:04 PM, March 17, 2008, Blogger abwilli3 said…

    I would utilize someone within the organization that has a good reputation with fellow employees and someone who employees relate to or "follow." This person can help to personalize the issue of change and easily explain the situation. I think if people know what to expect and understand the situation with a little reassurance from someone they trust, they will be willing to change.

     

  • At 8:57 PM, March 17, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I would fire everyone and start over. No, just kidding.

    I think everyone had good ideas.

    I tend to think positive motivation is more successful than negative. Although, in this situation a realistic idea portrayed to my employees might do the trick.

    I would first call a meeting and give everyone the details that I have on the situation. I would bring up the topic of change and how it could negatively or positively affect all of our livelihoods. I would solicit forward thinking and creative solutions. Without critisizing our current plan, I would advise that we need a new strategy.

    I would then let everyone think on this for a week or so.

    You can positively motivate individuals by believing in them and convincing them that they are valuable and necessary for success. I would have one on one meetings with each and assure them that they are too valuable to lose, and we as a team will not overcome this obstacle unless he/she was 100% on board.

    I would then ask for new "focus goals" for the next 30,60,90 days and then consolidate them into a document and present to the whole group.

    We would then go over them with a fine toothed comb and pick 4 or 5 that most closely resembled the group consensus and make them our mantra.

    By sticking to our focus goals and working hard at our new ideas, I believe we would move the mountain of staleness to a culture of change.

    And then if that didn't work, I would fire them all and start all over :)

     

  • At 8:59 PM, March 17, 2008, Blogger Emily Burnett said…

    Since change is sometimes necessary but not always welcome, an organization should first consider the following tactics: 1- educate everyone involved. If people know the situation and understand the reason and need for change, they will be more likely to adopt change. 2- include everyone who will be affected in the decision making. This strategy will be beneficial because involving more people will allow for more ideas about how to bring about change and because if everyone feels like they have a voice and their opinion matters, they will feel ownership in the new ideas and will be more likely to embrace change.

     

  • At 9:52 PM, March 17, 2008, Blogger Lei said…

    I think I would go along the line of persuasive strategies, starting from weakening their commitment to their original position that everything is fine and there is no need for change. I would start from the point of agreement instead of directly attacking their position by stating that our routine has indeed been working for the past few years, but part of the reason is that we have never had competitors. However, there is a critical distinction now that this new organization is catching up with us pretty fast.

    The next step involves identifying a set of puzzling examples that although they think our routine is still working at present, it is actually not. I would use examples from my research on our competitor to illustrate that we are losing volunteers, what wonderful services the new organization are offering. The point is to show my colleagues and boss that things are not "fine" as they may think and to increase the sense of urgency on the new environment we are facing.

    After that, I would also make suggestions about steps we can take to make changes happen - the important thing here is to seek incremental changes on one aspect at a time instead of pushing them to completely change over night. Another thing is to identify possible actions clearly. Once they see the organization can benefit from small changes, they would be more confident to carry out further changes.

     

  • At 10:36 PM, March 17, 2008, Blogger Jessica said…

    One thing I learned in a psychology class as an undergrad was the idea of ‘group think.’ This is where a group of people (the same people) get together and try to work together to make decisions. Many times quiet people get lost in the debate with more outspoken people, or leaders overshadow their employees, but what happens is that the group comes to a final consensus that turns out to be the wrong idea or an old one. One that, at any rate, not everyone really agrees on, even if they all decided on it. Another problem with this scenario is that they get no advice from people outside the group or company: if it were a non-profit, they would not be getting input from the clients, donors, volunteers, community, politicians, etc.

    If a new non-proft were able to step on the feet of mine, I would, first of all, try to get the ideas and feelings of the members of my organization. Rather than having this in a group setting, I would try meeting with people one on one to see what each individual can bring to the table as far as new ideas, tactics, skills and knowledge are concerned. This is a great way to gather new ideas, especially those that people are too timid to share in a group setting.

    Second of all, I would try to meet with people not directly working for the association as I mentioned above: volunteers, donors, etc. Again, see what kind of new ideas they can bring. I would also encourage them to speak to my employees about what they need in an organization and what we should change. It would be better for the organization to hear from an outsider what things could be improved, how to improve it, and how that will make our organization more successful

    Adapting to change requires new ideas and perspectives, not the same old ones over and over again. To avoid ‘group think’ and making poor business/non-profit PR decisions, it is best to hear from all people involved and what each can offer. Those three overbearing, loud employees in the staff meeting of 15 might make all the decisions, but those decisions are not necessarily right or good. Make sure to involve as many people as possible!

     

  • At 11:47 PM, March 17, 2008, Blogger cfriedman22 said…

    I would start by doing some research on my own about how other NPOs that were similar to us were doing things. I would take ideas, photos, websites, brochures, etc. and show them to the other members, or better yet take them to see what they are doing. Maybe we have a river close by and we too can do a rubber ducky race. I would also do some digging about what it would take to make some of their ideas ours (time, money, volunteers, etc). The marketing group I worked for always had us share ideas and encouraged us to take them and make them our own - so what worked for Joe in Nevada could work for me in Tennessee. I agree that people should be given some time to think about their own possible ideas and perhaps submit them in writing, so no one feels pressured to go along with another's idea.

    I would also investigate our competition and present possible fallout. To stay "on top" you have to stay hungry and two steps ahead of your competitor. It might be hard to get people who are well, lazy, to come up with new ideas when they have been in a rut for so long. Showing them that they have excited, fresh, and innovative staffers who are courting our donors might wake them up.

    It would also be possible to gather ideas from a local college class or have them work on a project. Sometimes when you've been in the forest for so long, you can't see the trees...Young minds that see from the outside the organization might give a boost to others.

     

  • At 11:17 AM, March 19, 2008, Blogger Jon Weiner said…

    My first step would be to gather all the information I could on the startup company, what they appear to be doing and how they appear to be doing it. Most everyone so far has started off by saying that they would call a meeting with the board, and I too would do this same thing after I had my research together about the startup competition.

    The key to presenting people with the idea of change in my opinion, especially given the pretense that the board is seemingly a bit stuck in their ways, is to break it in slowly. The board needs to see that this new group does indeed present a real threat, and that some amount of creativity is going to be needed in order to keep up the organizations status as the most recognizable and credible NPO serving this particular interest.

    I would present the board with a very straight forward, fact-laden and logical summary of what the new organization is offering that we were not, and why this may be attractive to some of our current donors and patrons. Once they recognize this idea as a real variable that needs to be dealt with, adapting the organization to meet the need won't seem like quite as much out-of-the-box action.

    My answer to the emergent organization would be to figure out what they were offering that we were not, and how we could counter it effectively. Competition emerges because there is a niche that is going unfilled, or because a new idea that has the potential to be a more effective solution comes about.

    No orgainzation can last forever doing business without evolving to meet current demands, whether they come from consumers, donors or technological innovations. If the startup organization is tapping into the market we are serving with a new approach, we would need to evolve in order to serve their same constituency in a better way.

    The thing that our organization has going for it is a recognizable and assumingly trustworthy name. You can't approach a board that is reluctant to change with a proposition to overhaul the way it has been operating successfully for some time. It takes baby steps, whether it means adapting to new technology or offering a new way of providing our traditional services to keep demand high. One small step at a time - this way you can test the new water without plunging in and risking a large backlash from the people you support or your donors if your approach turns out to be the wrong one.

     

  • At 11:55 PM, March 24, 2008, Blogger SIUchristina said…

    Again, sorry this is so late :(
    I think the best way to prove your case is by backing up what you're saying with facts - show your NPO that this is working for other similar NPOs. I think they need to feel like if they don't change, it may hurt them, their donors, clients, and volunteers in the long run. The goal of any NPO is to stay afloat - be successful in fulfilling your mission. If you need to make changes to do that, then so be it!
    Baby steps are the key, especially for those resistant to change. You can't propose a complete overhaul and expect these change-fearers to just give in and say okay. Once one small change has been successful, it will be easier to make your case for implementing additional changes. If training is necessary to successfully implement these changes, this needs to be factored in - be realistic!

     

Post a Comment

<< Home