Another thoughtful panel at the N-TEN conference was a session covering the "Next Generation of Open Tools." Although the well-meaning panelists did a tidy job of defining Web 2.0 - and the idea of more engaged constituents was appealing - the nonprofits in the room found it hard to see how open source tools could apply to their efforts.
That being said, the panelists included:
- David Greenberg, Social Source Foundation
- Chris Messina, Round Two
- John Lorance, CompuMentor
- Billy Bicket, CompuMentor
What Web 2.0 can mean for nonprofits
The general sense
was that nonprofits could use Web 2.0 tools to give constituents the
framework and tools that they need to both express creativity and speak
to mission. The big difference is that Web 1.0 pushed content down to
participants, whereas Web 2.0 allows participants to talk back; these
two-way conversations enable richer, more intimate connections between
nonprofits and their constituents.
Why open source is becoming relevant
Open source tools are more mature, and much easier to support than
they were just a few years ago. Now, open source organizations can get
started with just modest investment - examples like Jotspot (up and
running with $200K) were discussed - and be ready for adoption quickly.
More to the point of Web 2.0, open source thinking breaks down barriers
between the desktop and the real world. Technorati shows 80,000 new
blogs per day, and Wikipedia has had 13,000 writers in its first three
years. Web 2.0 allows more collaborative knowledge to be developed and
shared.
Why it matters
All of this froth around
Web 2.0 and open source means that nonprofits have new ways to spread
their message and drive sustainability. Missions are driven further,
faster when you can get folks engaged with your community rather than
simply asking them for a check.
The undercurrent to all of this
was the panel's message that nonprofits need to shift their thinking,
and to become less competitive and more collaborative. [Note: No nonprofit wants to hear about the cultural shifts they have to make from a panel of techies.] Here's the reasons that were plugged:
- Collaboration makes the pie bigger, rather than setting up a fight for the same limited set of resources
- Constituents want to do more for an organization when they feel ownership
- Culture of sharing is not inherent to most nonprofits, so give everyone a voice in a shared platform (e.g., wikis)
- Institutional knowledge can be developed from the openness of a bottom-up organization
Some of these useful takeaways were lost at the time because of the cultural differences between the panelists' own organizations and the nonprofits in the room. The product demos, for example, focused on technical features rather than on solving everyday problems that nonprofits face. Still, a worthwhile effort and some good information was shared.
Tags: christine herron spacejockeys best practices technology open source n-ten advocacy
