Hey John. :-) Comments inline; I'm kind of tired so I may meander. John Hibbs wrote: > Can those doing not-for-profit work "sell" the idea that they reach > Movers and Shakers? Aren't people who do not-for-profit work - aren't they 'Movers and Shakers'? I suspect this is about finance, though, but I wanted to stick that out there.
I recognize I am probably a minority on the list, but I think self-sustaining non-profits are the way to go. Self sustaining in that they are profitable; as Henry Ford said (paraphrased) 'a good company makes more than money'. Thinking out loud - with a stretch, we can say that non-profits exist because other areas do not provide value to groups, and the non-profits are created to fill those voids. So when looking for funding for non-profits, we're looking for funding from the same groups that could not provide that value in the first place (something I will carry over to a philanthropy list I am on). Einstein did say that a problem cannot be solved at the same level of thinking that created it. Maybe he was on to something. ;-) > That while it is hard to provide benchmarks and > absolutes it is "easy" to make the claim that "good work supported by > good (for profit) companies" is a /profitable/ undertaking? That the > direct links between the work itself might be hard of precisely > substantiate; but the linkage by way of conversation, dialogue, press > release, blog, list serv, video uploads have impact as favorable to > the sponsor as a Coke ad behind home plate during the World Series. > > If Coke can make the claim more people drink their beverage based on > people interested in a baseball outcome, why can't non profits make > the same kind of claim? > Branding? One thing I have learned is that if one stirs the pot of smelly stuff (PG list, use your imagination), you end up smelling like what is in the pot. And then, even away from the pot, you are associated with the stuff in the pot. If, for example, you are constantly looking for funding - people will see you coming from a mile away. If you disagree with something, you become associated with what you disagree with. It isn't wrong or right - it is simply what it is.Branding can be good either way. But non-profit folk - like any other folk - like to hang out and talk with like-minded people. It isn't a sin, but I often think it is self-defeating in many instances, especially when it comes to communicating to people 'outside of the group'. For the communication to occur, the value has to be shared. That value is a funny thing. I can explain open standards and open source concepts to a farmer in a rumshop, but for some reason I can't explain the same things to an IT Professional who wants nothing to do with 'open'. Unlearning, maybe, but it has more to do with shared values. A farmer can understand the importance of a tractor which allows one to open the hood and fix it, or allow anyone else to fix it. An IT Professional may see that as a direct attack on their bread and butter. I have an opinion on that which is fairly well known, but it is an example. I think what we're all working towards in our own way is a bit of culture change around us. Maybe explaining things to 1000 farmers is more important than explaining things to a single IT Professional. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad and Tobago [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/knowprose/ "Criticize by creating." — Michelangelo "The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine." - Nikola Tesla _______________________________________________ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@digitaldivide.net http://digitaldivide.net/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
