Election Wrap-up

Last week, voters in Maine and Texas passed referenda that authorized additional bonding for state higher education institutions.  The referendum in Maine passed with 51 percent, and voters approved a $43.5 million bonding package for construction projects at higher education facilities across the state.  Similarly, in Texas 66 percent of voters passed a $500 million bonding reauthorization for student loan programs.

However, not all voters embraced an increase in state barrowing.  For example, New Jersey voters rejected Governor Corzine's proposal to allocate state bond money for stem cell research which would have directed some money to the state public universities.  This measure was similar to the one that passed in California in 2004. Overall, Election Day was a fairly good day for higher education institutions at the ballot box.  In addition to the passage of these referenda questions, a pro-higher education governor was elected in Kentucky.

Pretty Good for Government Work

The US House of Representatives Committee on Labor and Education has developed a mini-site explaining the benefits of the recently passed College Cost Reduction and Access Act. The web site is a great example of how organizations and institutions should get their message out in the online age. The web site features a creative video that is a parody on the Match.com commercials, an online dating site. The video is a great example of how to use humor to educate the viewer on your particular issue; in this instance, on what the College Cost Reduction Act does for college students.

The web site also allows visitors to see how much money they will personally save as a result of the law, as well as how much money students in their state may save. The web site also gives visitors tools to share the web site with others via social networking sites or tagging sites. This web site has all the important features of a good mini-site:

1. Personalization
2. Humor
3. Make it easy to share

Opening Doors

In recent years, many higher education institutions started to use technology to open the doors of higher education to the public. Last week, the University of California at Berkeley launched a YouTube channel that will make 86 courses available online this academic year. But what makes their effort especially notable is that they are also using the site to promote the University and its mission.

Higher education institutions are finding it increasingly difficult to get positive information to the public about the great services and research that occurs on campus every day. The mainstream media tends to only cover the controversies and scandals at higher education institutions. Those negative stories have a huge impact on how the public views higher education institutions and ultimately those views are expressed to elected officials, who control the institution's purse strings.

That is why it is so critical that higher education institutions find alternative ways to distribute positive stories about their institutions. But just putting press releases online or releasing canned promotional videos will not be enough to effectively distribute messages. The information must be packaged with something that provides a real value to the web site's visitor. The UC Berkeley YouTube channel does this well because it provides a service that will attract visitors to the site and keep them coming back for more.

Any higher education institution can identify some sort of service it provides that will attract an audience. The key is to capture the audience and then incorporate positive news about your institution into that service. This will be one of the main strategies that higher education institutions use to communicate positive messages to the public in the 21^st century.

Why Do Colleges Need lobbyists?

An article this week in the IndyStar explored how Higher Education institutions are spending an increasing amount of money on federal lobbying.  This increase in spending is causing some elected officials and advocacy groups to question whether public higher education institutions should spend money on lobbying.  Legislation has even been introduced to ban public institutions from spending federal public money on lobbying.  This same issue is often brought up at state legislatures around the country.

However, this approach represents a very "Polyanna" view of our legislative process.  Lobbying is a critical way that elected officials hear the needs of public colleges and universities around the country.  Many institutions have stepped up their federal lobbying efforts because of the cuts that they are facing from their state legislatures back home.

The trend of spending more money on lobbyists is not unique to higher education.  From 2000 to 2005 the number of federal lobbyists doubled and the amount spent on lobbying reached a record $2.1 billion.  If higher education institutions don't have lobbyists, then their voice is going to be drowned out by all the private lobbyists petitioning Congress steer money in other directions.

The move to ban public money from being spent on lobbyists is something all higher education institutions should take note of.  It reinforces the need for institutions to diversify how they advocate for public investment in higher education.  Lobbying itself is no longer enough.  Integrating grassroots and public relations efforts is the best way for institutions to make their case to elected officials.  Showing that the public supports your institution is more effective than just saying it.

Online Philanthropy Engaging Young Donors

There is a great article in the Wall Street Journal about how young people are reinventing philanthropy.  Instead of just giving money, young people are using online technologies to inspire their friends and family into giving to their favorite causes as well.  Interestingly, some of the individuals profiled in the article actually created their own online tools to create online communities in order to engage people they know.   

Traditional fundraising appeals do not appear to be effective with younger individuals.  This is a sign of things to come for those doing philanthropy.   Large direct mail pieces just don't have the power that they used to have.  Five to ten years ago, organizations could send out a direct mail piece to a good prospect list and expect a decent return.  But, as this type grassroots fundraising changes, organizations need to identify evangelists that will go out and talk to their community of friends and family about donating to your organization.  We continue to find that individuals are more responsive when appeals come from people they know and when action is easy to take, such as by the simple click of the mouse.

Developing these evangelists is not always easy.  Here are some steps you can take to cultivate your own group on evangelists:

1. Identify existing evangelists
   See which of your supporters consistently open e-mails and take action.  These people are your evangelists.
2. Personalize it!
   Allowing people to personalize a message increases the chances that the message will actually be listened to.
3. Offer incentives
   Similar to rewards points for credit cards, incentives can go a long way to motivate people to take action.
4. Recognize their work
   Volunteer recognition is critical component to volunteer management.

Getting Political - tracking what they say

The Education Writers Association recently launched a blog monitoring what the presidential candidates are saying about education issues.  It explores both K-12 and higher education policy issues.  This will be a useful service to help educate advocates where the presidential candidates stand.

I will add an RSS feed from the Education Election blog to this web site so that you can track the candidates from the EDUadvocates web site.

Why the Internet Matters

The Internet is more than just a passing fad and will be a critical component to any electoral campaign during the 2008 election and beyond.  We have already seen many of the presidential contenders tapping into the netroots to raise money and recruit volunteers. 

But why should higher education institutions pay attention to these campaigns?  Campaigns only last for 18-24 months but higher education institutions must plan for the long-term.  As a result of these short time frame campaigns have become very innovative strategies and tactics to disseminate information. 

But many higher education institutions have shied away from using the Internet because it has not been proven that it is an effective tool.  Many institutions tend to stick with traditional communication methods such as direct mail, media (paid and earned), and phoning.  But it is time that interactive communication be placed on the same level as these other tools for a variety of reasons.

The Internet matters because...

1. It is where people are going to get information
   According to the Pew Internet American Life Project, 31% of all Americans, or about 60 million people, say they were online during the 2006 campaign season gathering information and exchanging views via email.
2. It is becoming harder to reach out to people through traditional means
   Television - Seventy-five percent of marketers feel that television advertising is becoming less effective and some have even declared the end of the 30-second television spot.  Direct mail - it is very difficult to break through the clutter. Newspaper and radio – less people are using traditional media. 
3. It is more interactive
   Traditional communication vehicles provide more of a broadcast model that simply distributes information to a targeted audience.  The Internet allows communication to become more interactive with the audience, as they can comment on the information or repackage the information.  This interactivity is critical to engaging any audience because the public wants this type of engagement.  That is why participation programs like American Idol and blogs have exploded in the last few years.
4. Individuals can get involved anytime and anyplace
   This level of convenience is something that the public has come to expect.  The Internet allows individual to customize their experience and get the level and type of information that they want.

Why the Internet works

1. Easy for people to participate
   With just a few clicks of a button supporters can donate money, contact their elected officials, or engage many of their friends to get involved.  The Internet makes it so easy for people to participate and get involved. People have many competing priorities and the Internet allows them to get involved without having to spend a lot of time.
2. Increase loyalty of supporters
   The Internet allows groups to communicate with members on a more regular basis.  This type of communication used to be extremely time consuming to develop and cost prohibitive.  But through e-mails, web sites and blogs, users can become more engaged and active.  This can be used to strengthen the relationship that your organization has with supporters and make them.
3. Improves speed and efficiency that information can get out
   The Internet allows institutions to very quickly and easily communicate with members.  The web is instantaneous; within a few minutes thousands of supporters can be notified about an issue and those messages can be easily passed onto to others extending the reach.
4. Save time and money
   Previously, to get information out to supporters, institutions would have to develop a direct mail piece.  Now the web allows institutions to communicate with members twice as much and at half the cost through the Internet.
5. Can evaluate it
   The Internet allows institutions to monitor who is taking action, what they are reading, and how many people they are forwarding the message to.  This real time evaluation is not possible with direct mail and advertising, and this data can help evaluate what messages are working who are your superstar activists.
6. Can target impact
   Once you know who those superstar activists are or what issues people are concerned about, your organization can customize messages to these individuals very easily.

The Power of Personal Stories

Charities have always done a great job of using personal stories to motivate people to act.  Now marketers and advocacy groups have embraced this tactic. A Washington Post article reports on how marketers are engaging customers to promote their products through personal stories.  For example, major companies are asking customers to develop their own ads to explain why they purchase particular cars or deodorant. This is a sign that Madison Avenue recognizes that consumers are now in control of brands and the messages.

"Grant McCracken, a cultural anthropologist affiliated with MIT, says participatory advertising represents a "revolution" in thinking. It means marketers are actually ‘inviting’ consumers ‘into the production of meaning,’ he says. ‘Just a few years ago people were still talking about trying to find and push the hot button inside the consumer.’”

This shift is also occurring in the advocacy realm.  Fresh Air Minnesota was created to reframe the debate around a state-wide smoking ban in Minnesota.  Initially, media coverage focused on how the proposed smoking ban may put some small bar and restaurant owners out of business.  The personal stories of these owners comprised a large part of the coverage.

In the face of these pressing personal stories, Fresh Air Minnesota recognized that the debate needed to focus on the health reason for supporting a smoking ban.  Bar and restaurant employees were being impacted by the negative health consequences of secondhand smoke.  The Fresh Air web site captured the personal stories on this side of the debate and helped distribute those stories out to the public.  In the end, this effort successfully reframed the debate and put a personal face on the health impacts of secondhand smoke in bars and restaurants and bars, which served as an effective counterpoint to the financial impacts first reported by the media.

This shows that personal stories can have a large impact in shifting public perception and elected officials’ opinions.  Collecting personal stories can effectively demonstrate how your issue impacts “people like me.”  And that is one of the most persuasive ways to make your argument.

Vote for Ed in '08

Vote for Ed in '08! He’s got a simple platform:  improve education standards, ensure that a qualified teacher leads every class and give students more time and support for learning. In actuality, Ed is not a candidate for president in 2008. 

It is a campaign that was launched last week by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation to put education back on the agenda for presidential candidates.   They plan to invest $60 million, almost as much as some presidential campaigns, to get elected officials more engaged in this debate.

This effort is long overdue and hopefully it will reenergize our nation’s passion for quality education.  Over the last ten years America has been taking the quality of our schools for granted, allowing many children to fall through the cracks.   This campaign has the opportunity to really bring people together to identify solutions to the growing trouble in our schools.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation have realized that foundations can’t just identify solutions as an armchair quarterback.  They now have to advocate for them.  Many foundations have stayed out of this area because politics is considered too messy, especially with all the legal rules governing advocacy and lobbying.

This effort is a sign of how foundations need to reexamine how they carry out their mission.  Political advocacy has become increasingly important to any organization, whether a corporation, non-profit, think tank, or foundation.  That is why so many of them have developed grassroots communities to support their issues.  Elected officials and the media listen carefully to informed, passionate advocates in today’s political environment.

Also, these grassroots communities are beneficial because they democratize organizations.  They become more transparent thus allowing feedback to travel more quickly to the leadership of the organization.  This is critical to the success of any organization over the short and long-term.

The Vote for Ed campaign has the potential to create a real dialogue on the education challenges facing this country.  Utilizing the latest tools and technologies to create an effective grassroots community, this is one campaign that politicians can’t afford to ignore.

Do interactive web sites increase giving?

A recent study by two professors at Bentley College found that candidates having the "most comprehensive and innovative websites" were the same candidates that raised the most money. The report does not prove that innovative web sites raise the money, but it begs the question: how effective is the web when it comes to fundraising?

Interactive web sites can do a much better job of not only getting your message heard but also having it sink in.  A study that I brought up in an earlier post demonstrated that readers are better able to retain information if it is displayed in a creative manner.

Plus, interactive web sites are more likely to get people coming back for more information.  Any fundraiser will tell you that it is all about developing effective relationships.  By capturing an individual’s e-mail address and urging him or her to create a profile on your site, you can easily cultivate a relationship with these individuals. 

The web allows you to develop these types of relationships with a much wider audience, thus increasing the potential amount of grassroots giving.  This does not replace the big donor giving, which is still cultivated through person-to-person interactions.  But, the web can match those big donations with thousands of smaller contributions.  Plus the excitement generated through grassroots fundraising can even motivate big donors to give to causes that they may not normally give to.  Both the Edwards and Obama campaigns have demonstrated this.  They both have more small donors and the best interactive and engaging web sites.

Thus, the answer to the question is yes - interactive web sites can be an effective tool to strengthen and develop relationships with donors big and small.