ROUND EIGHT: Everything's Peachy

Here's what I take away from 99% of the online communications I see from organizations operating in and around the cerebral palsy / neurological disorders / brain research / special needs arena: 

Everything's peachy.

You had a great 2013. 
You're right on track for 2014. 
You know just what you're doing. (You're "collaborating.") 
Sure you could use a ton of money -- for what, you rarely say -- but outside o' that?

Peachy.

If I'm reading you correctly that means:

• Your operations are going like gangbusters and need no improving. Your processes are smooth and efficient. As for your programs, products, and services? They're all grand slam home runs.

• The dozens of projects to which you've committed are being broken down into smaller task-chunks and getting checked off -- on time, in every department, to great effect. (That you selected the right projects based on the right strategies in the first place goes without saying.) 

• You're adequately addressing all the "look into" things you and your staff have been hoping and meaning to explore or pursue but haven't had the time to. 

If that's what you're telling me, I'm sorry but --  

I don't buy it for a minute. 

For a variety of reasons. Not the least of which is the fact that so few organizations are as well oiled or productive as they could be. 

I believe you could use all kinds of help. 

Curiously enough, though, your communications never say so explicitly. You show no signs you're in the market for any of the kinds of help I alluded to above. You never say you don't know. You never acknowledge you need more expertise or resources. You never discuss things that flop.

You never let 'em see you sweat. 

That's par for the management and organizational-communications course historically. Remember earlier web sites? 100% PR-filtered and one-way. ("This is what we decided to say about ourselves after we had a chance to deliberate.") I'm not surprised that many of your sites still are. But the fact that I'm seeing the same sorts of patterns with regard to your blogs and Facebook pages concerns me.

How come?

Well, I tend to go along with an observation Dan Pallotta made in his much circulated TED speech from March of 2013, that "Our problems are massive in scale [and] our organizations are tiny up against them."  

Our problems are massive. 

Current conventional CP therapies offer only a 4-10% average gain for any particular individual.* One in eighty-eight children is being diagnosed with autism. We can't afford for our organizations, individually and /or collectively, to be tiny up against our challenges. Not everything's peachy.

What's social media got to do with it? 

I wouldn't go so far as to say that our social media approaches and practices are keeping us tiny. I would say, however, that they're not doing much to make us bigger up against our challenges. And I believe they could.  

And must.

What makes social media special is its two-way-ness. The ability to use it to "engage with" (as opposed to "broadcast to") others. Especially w/ lots of others. A general formula that seems to be emerging for using social media to advance one's mission? Help others help you. Improve your performance by helping smart and passionate others improve their own performance.

Practically speaking, the idea is to (1.) put your true organizational self out there, (2.) tell the world what, specifically, is important to your future success, and (3.) invite people to apply their talents, creativity, and skills to it. How to do these things, e.g., what inducements to offer would-be participants, depends on you and your context. 

My response /call to action:

I'm experimenting with something that could conceivably help your organization "open itself up" to additional help from the outside. Via my Parents2Projects Facebook page and "Calls 2 Action" map (below) I'm trying to get the word out to potential workers / helpers / service providers that there's much important work to be done in our community. 

You may be able to help your organization by telling me what help you want or need. Tell me about projects, would-be projects, or specific tasks you could use some help completing. From the profound to the mundane. Of any size or scope. Shoot 'em my way and I'll see what I can do to connect you with low- or no-cost "people power" to get them done. Please contact me here, or through Facebook.

What's there to lose? Who's to say we couldn't drum up a critical mass of participants and amplify our productivity and impact beyond our wildest dreams?

Create your own mind maps at MindMeister 

*per Dr. Iona Novak from CP Alliance in Australia

ROUND EIGHT: I Commend You

I don't know these days if people are still handing out kudos, or even props for that matter, but I want to -- to RespectAbilityUSA.

How come?

Based on first impressions only of its Facebook activities, I see an organization using social media for more than just fundraising or marketing communications. I see it using social media strategically, too, for doing important, mission-driven work.

In the past 4-6 weeks, for example, RA has issued at least 4-6 unique calls to action. (I know in at least two cases its calls were answered.) It has invited constituents to: 

• participate in a conference call 

• complete a survey 

• submit photos 

• provide pro bono camerawork, and 

• be interviewed. 

Could this mean it actually gets what it means to "be digital" and why things necessarily start and end with the constituent? 

In any case, RespectAbility's Facebook page strikes me as a good environment for knowledge; a good environment for learning. There's a working community in the making there. And since at this point I can only imagine giving its leaders a "smartie" award for productive Net behavior -- I wish 'em well. 

I hope other nonprofits working in and around the CP and special needs realm take note.

ROUND THREE: What CP Parents Are For (Part C)

The next questions for leaders of CP-facing orgs become: How can you capture the passionate participation of CP parents? How do go about making better use of their know-how and know-what to get much needed knowledge work done? I'll suggest a general answer or two herein. In Part D, I'll get specific.

*  *  *  *  *

The Net. The Net. The Net. 
Need I say more?

When I say "the Net," what I really mean is our whole digital infrastructure. And I tend to make a simplistic distinction: 

On the one hand, I think of technologies and related practices that have to do with accessing and attracting resources. They're what most people probably think of when they think of social media. I more or less associate them with online communication and selling or fundraising. As for their roles in finding expertise and getting things done? They enable organizations to "selectively" tap into the world's intelligence, i.e., to find in the masses exactly the (small number of) knowledge or other resources they need.

To really drive performance rapidly to new levels, however, it's argued by the likes of too-many-management-consultants-to-try-to-name that organizations need to provide people with tools, resources, and incentives to mass collaborate. (Instead of social media think social production.) Here it's the use of "collective" intelligence -- the pooling of many small and incremental community contributions into useful bodies of knowledge -- they're touting.

Our own CP nonprofits provide us with examples of the latter. Two that jump right to mind: (1.) Michele Shusterman's / CP Daily Living's use of a Change.org petition platform in attempt to get United Cerebral Palsy (UCP) to change its name* and (2) Reaching For The Stars' use of blogging, e-mailing, and online contact forms -- in combination -- to enlist parents and physicians in successfully securing language in the 2013 Appropriations budget for specific Cerebral Palsy research funding. My "A Tale of Two Hope Machines" series also covers some of UCP's successful forays.

More about tapping into selective (Part D.1) and collective (Parts D.2 and D.3) intelligence to come.

I'd say we're just scratching the surface as it relates to taking advantage of the hidden talent out there. And I don't think it'd be unfair to there's way more social media than there is social production. The latter is difficult. Choosing projects that are worth pursuing, having well-formed purposes, clearly articulating the benefits to community members to contributing, etc. -- these are tricky propositions. 

If our orgs passionately want to improve and get better, though, they'll want to explore and master all of the above. 

*359 supporters have signed to date

PRE-FIGHT: Let's Glove Up

Here's how my pea brain's mind's eye sees things:

ON ONE HAND

We have various organizations and institutions, for and not for profit, that are committed to fighting the Cerebral Palsy fight and improving outcomes as they relate to CP. 

To me, they look to be doing bang-up jobs: pounding away at key challenges and opportunities; landing their share of punches. Becoming...thanks largely to advances in fields like genetics and robotics and brain science...encouraged and emboldened -- even to the point of believing that theirs-and-ours is a winnable battle. Even in the previously inconceivable sense that CP will someday be both preventable and curable. 

I'm excited along with them. 

I'd be a lot more excited if I knew that their various visions were about to be realized, say, this week. Even a year from now would be a more than acceptable time frame. 

Unrealistic? Could never happen? 

Maybe. 

Who's really to say? 

At a bare minimum, I don't think it's too overly whacky to suggest that big things could conceivably happen in the CP arena sooner rather than later and that, furthermore, we all ought to open our minds' eyes -- wider than they are now -- to what's possible. 

ON THE OTHER HAND

Over the past few years, I've immersed myself in enough management writing to have at least a feel for who the more influential thinkers are and what they're thinking about. What interests me most is their work on helping organizations get smarter and better, faster. (much of which is intimately tied to disruptive technologies like cloud computing, social media, mobile, and big data)

How're they doing? 

They're figuring things out. They're making discoveries. They're experiencing some wins. 

Many of them are fired up about what's possible, too. 

I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND

We in the CP sphere should take greater advantage of what those management gurus -- those business brainiacs -- have to offer. 

Why's that?

Because CP has been kicking our butts. 

No offense to any one individual or CP organization, but -- we need help. All the help we can get. Why fight with one hand tied behind our back if we don't have to?

The good news is that the products of those folks' energies and efforts are more widely and readily available than ever before. They're there for the taking. So, too, are the opportunities for making personal connections. Accessing them, and attracting them to us and our "defeat CP" cause, should be straightforward.

We'll have to strive as a group, however, to become more:

1. OPEN

At the risk of exposing my own biases and nincompoopery, I am (via this post and this blog) putting myself out there in hopes that someone will come along and help me become a better / smarter CP fighter. Our orgs need to follow suit. To "get back," we need to give. We need to offer up our challenges and opportunities, our responses and results -- the whole of it -- to critical thought and commentary. 

May be worth taking under advisement:

• We should resist believing we're on the right track and therefore in no need of new and different ways of thinking or acting. The truth is, our mental models, e.g., our strategies and roadmaps and visions, are laughably small relative to the enormousness of our challenges. 

• Like CP itself, the problems we face are complex. In the words of David K. Hurst, "good questions are (often) better than good answers." Wisdom begins with an admission of ignorance. 

• A lack of funding doesn't have to slow us down. Money's just one of many resources we may acquire, mobilize, leverage, etc. 

• Keep this in mind: “There are always more smart people outside your company than within it.”* The staff at SUBWAY this month is wearing t-shirts that read "Make Us Better / Take Our Survey." If the biggest corporations are looking every which way for better ideas, we should probably be doing the same.

2. FINDABLE/ LOCATABLE 

I hope to be able to use this blogspace to make our leading CP organizations more visible to leading management thinkers -- and vice versa. My little mission is to facilitate connections. Very-best-case outcomes, to my way of thinking, would involve collaborative problem solving and co-creation activities between both sides. (both "hands") To that end, I invite participation. 

So, for example, to:

• Cynthia @ Reaching for the Stars: If you want to share your views here about what you believe it'll take to build "a foundation of hope for children with cerebral palsy"; if you want to name your pains; if you want to go public with your lengthy "things to do" list -- either directly or indirectly through me -- you're more than welcome to!! 

• John Seely Brown and John Hagel @ Deloitte Center for the Edge: You wrote in The Power of Pull (2008) about "Harnessing Pull to Change the World," and specifically about mastering pull "at the individual and institutional level to achieve much broader impact in economic and social arenas." I welcome either or both of you to use this forum to teach us how to beat CP. Feel free, in other words, to stop by and solve our problems for us!!

There's also a Twitter component to this. It'll be devoted to more of the same (as above) but revolve around a particular, pick-up-the-pace goal. 

I want things to move faster. Way, way faster than we're generally envisioning now. Using a (crude?) boxing analogy, I hope to be able to look at the next year as if it were a 12-round fight -- with an intention of knocking CP on its duff by the end. As Chief Inciter, I'll report on how the fight's progressing and do whatever I can to influence things in our favor. My tweets and interactions will be directed at the level of the organization, but anyone's more than welcome to follow along @KnockOutCP.

CLOSING

`A la Ralph Waldo Emerson, David Weinberger writes in Too Big To Know (2012): 

We thus do not yet have any good idea of what cannot be done by connected humans when working at the scale of the Net. 

We truly don't know what can or can't be accomplished. 

So...

Why not get ready to rumble?

Round one's set to start on June first.

*quote attributed to Silicon Valley icon Bill Joy (co-founder of Sun Microsystems)

A Tale of Two Hope Machines, 8.4.A

An organization that makes it to the FORGING rung (step five of six on Gartner’s analogical ladder) is in rarefied air. UCP shows signs of being close. As I hinted at earlier, though, I doubt that it’s actually there – in no small part because the deck's been stacked against it from the start. 

What do I mean?

Becoming a social organization isn’t easy. The authors of The Social Organization warn us of that in the Intro, and then re-warn readers in Chapter 3 that putting mass collaboration to work requires “a high degree of corporate skill that most companies will struggle to develop for many years to come.” It only stands to reason that UCP is probably struggling, too. 

Those same authors also researched community collaboration adoption across many fields. When it came time to rank the more active adopters, nonprofits didn’t make the cut. “The highest adoption tier comprises retail, government, media, IT, and consumer products.” Except maybe for the elite of the elite, I wouldn’t expect health nonprofits to be up to the same speed (as organizations in those other industries).*

Still...

In significant ways UCP looks to be bucking any low-to-moderate expectations and becoming a social organization:

• It has a history of having experimented with online communities over the years. (to which I’ve alluded before) 

• UCP has professed its belief in the strategic importance of community collaboration. From its most recent annual report: “UCP recognizes the power of social media to amplify the voices of people with disabilities and all who care about their civil rights struggle. UCP invests heavily in updating and refocusing its social media presence during fiscal years 2010 and 2011.” This tells me the requisite mindset is in place, i.e., the people pulling the strings there don’t think entirely in terms of hierarchy and traditional management. 

• As a parent of a child with CP, I’m thankful that there are multiple ways for me to communicate and collaborate – not only with UCP’s staff, but with its whole network of friends, beneficiaries, partners, and so on. UCP has advanced past the “broadcasting at people” to the “engaging with people” stage. 

To the last point, you could say UCP now manages its own portfolio of platforms. (something social organizations do) Some of them are limited-time-only. Others are ongoing. Next thing I want to do is arrange the ones I know about accordingly.

A ONE-SHOT DEAL?

In conjunction with World CP Day, UCP is one of several global sponsors of the Change my world in 1 minute initiative. How it works: “Throughout August and September [2012], people with cerebral palsy were given the opportunity to express what they needed to make their lives more independent or rewarding. Those ideas were posted…and participants were asked to vote for the ideas they liked the best.” Now in its second phase, this is a great example of a collaborative community charged with performing a variety of disparate tasks, including generating innovative ideas and locating experts (crowd sourcing) in a large community.  

CONTINUOUS

• “Why build your own social community if you can achieve your purpose on someone else’s?” UCP has joined some existing general social web communities (Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube) and maintains multiple accounts.** 

• The My Child Without Limits Support Community connects families, friends and caregivers for support and inspiration. It’s a powerful platform that enables people to connect and collaborate with others in a variety of ways, most notably via a discussion forum. Rather than build this community from scratch, UCP opted to join an existing specific social web community. More about this in part B.

• Life Labs is a home-grown UCP social community. (It’s “only” five clicks away from UCP's homepage if you know what you’re looking for! That’ll be my only jab. I personally think all of these communities are a little hard to get to.) One of the key objectives of the Life Without Limits initiative as it’s currently construed is to help improve the lives “of people with disabilities by harnessing the latest innovations in technology to increase their access to the wider world and marketplace.” Life Labs is dedicated to developing technology-based solutions for people with disabilities and partnering with others who are similarly interested in accessible and inclusive technology. Among other things, its site employs social technologies out the wazoo. There’s: a blog; an option to join Life Labs on Google Groups; a Twitter account; a wiki…

My Child and Life Labs are collaborative communities. It's through these, in particular, that UCP demonstrates that the foundation is there, the basics are in place, for becoming a social organization. 

The platforms show me that UCP knows [1.] what collaborative communities are, [2.] what the defining characteristics are, and [3.] how organizations are using mass collaboration to achieve bigger, faster and better results: 

1. Remember the three indispensable components for mass collaboration?  Life Labs has what I think is a compelling PURPOSE. There’s a very active COMMUNITY at My Child. Both sites use SOCIAL MEDIA extensively. UCP obviously does.
2. Both communities are run in accordance with Gartner's “fundamental principles or defining characteristics of mass collaboration.” Without going into detail, the six (6) principles are : participation, collective, transparency, independence, persistence, and emergence.
3. In both instances UCP's using social media in support of “collective intelligence”: the pooling of small and incremental contributions into a coherent and useful body of knowledge. (Via Life Labs, for example, people are generating innovative ideas, solving difficult challenges, and engineering products. At My Child, people are posting content, augmenting it, categorizing it, and so on.) This is a proven -- legit', if you will -- way of using mass collaboration advantageously. 

To repeat: the foundation is there. 

Now...

How far can UCP go? How are the communities built on that foundation actually doing? How much real value are they delivering? And, how well is UCP doing all the other things it needs to do to build collaboration competence up and down the organization? Well enough to garner a great Gartner grade?

My best guess in part B.

*especially in the absence of fierce and direct competition
**It has at least three different Facebook accounts, for example.

A Tale of Two Hope Machines, 8.3

Redtreehouse.org was created to provide a welcoming and vibrant online community for exploring resources to help children and young adults, prenatal through age 25. To call it an online community, though, may be a little misleading. 

When Gartner and others who are hipper than I am to social media think “online community,” they’re thinking collaborative community; they’re thinking mass collaboration. And in order for mass collaboration to be, three things are indispensable: Social Media. Purpose. Community. 

A few words about each: 

• Social Media: where people collaborate. Redtreehouse.org isn’t technically a social media environment. It doesn’t use mass collaboration-enabling tools such as wikis, blogs, social networking, tagging, etc.

• Community: the people who collaborate. Red Treehouse is essentially a collection of individuals, so you could say it’s a community.

• Purpose: why people collaborate. The organization itself has a purpose, but there’s not a purpose around which user contributions are directed, e.g., other parents like me don’t come to the site to contribute their knowledge, experience, and ideas to address specific challenges or opportunities. 

This isn't to suggest that Red Treehouse doesn’t value collaboration. Or that it isn't successfully facilitating the formation of communities. (maybe even vibrant ones) (maybe even massive ones) What I am saying is that any and all collaboration that may be happening is happening offline*. People are Making Connections, Discovering Answers, and Finding Hope someplace else. Face-to-face. Again, collaborative communities in the Gartner sense use social media to join people together online to address challenges or opportunities.

Thus begging the question: If redtreehouse.org isn’t an online community, what is it? A directory, maybe? One that’s updated regularly. One that allows you to refine your search…

*  *  *  *  *

Like an entertainment directory? 

Hmm. Now that I think of it, I wonder if Red Treehouse is really all that different in its scope than, say, Cleveland Scene, which highlights Cleveland-area arts, music, dining, films, and which brings together the same “three sources for information and support.” Visitors there can search for and find: organizations (restaurants, arts and entertainment venues, shops, etc.) and events. Pickings under the resources category may be a little lean, but they’re there, too.

At least two things set the online Scene apart for me. One: it incorporates social media (blogs, Twitter and Facebook feeds) – including for purposes of community collaboration. For example, you’re able to review events and venues. Two: it looks like a Web 2.0 site. If "vibrant and welcoming" is Red Treehouse’s goal, its management should have a look: www.clevescene.com. 

 *  *  *  *  *

There’s nothing wrong with being more like a directory. Tools for Today and Tomorrow, the precursor to the current project, won awards. It made possible the bringing together of “more than 14,000 parents, guardians, professionals, and organizations together through workshops, conferences and the toolsfortoday.org website to inform, learn from, support and inspire one another in order to help children, families and caregivers live for today and plan for tomorrow.” Then in 2011 Ronald McDonald House (RMH) of Cleveland and Ohio Families and Children First (OFCF) pooled their resources so that they might propel a broader, stronger online tool.  

What was tried and true got new and improved.

For me, the questions now become:

Could adding online collaborative communities to the mix make what’s already good even better? Could what Gartner has to offer help Red Treehouse live up to its potential as a hope machine? And, if “yes” to both, how would the former go about helping the latter develop the superior capabilities it’d need?

Gartner actually has a step-by-step plan for building those managerial capabilities. A few of the steps I imagine they’d emphasize with regard to Red Treehouse:

• They’d help it get a better grip, in general, on what the power of using social media to tap into the skills and know-how of lots and lots of people around a common purpose can do. 

• They’d ask management at Red Treehouse about the most important goals or challenges it’s identified as standing between where the organization is and where it wants to be. This is the first place they’d look at applying community collaboration as a way of delivering value. 

• Based on how other organizations are successfully employing social media collaboratively, they’d help Red Treehouse brainstorm: "these are the audiences community collaboration efforts most commonly target; these are the categories of business value (e.g., customer responsiveness, product /service development) most commonly addressed; these are the leading reasons organizations use mass collaboration to gain value; these are the dominant types of mass collaboration being used" -- all in an effort to generate ideas about where community collaboration efforts could help the organization reach its goals. 

• They’d help Red Treehouse develop an organizational strategy for community collaboration. 

• They’d focus on helping Red Treehouse succeed with one or two community collaboration efforts and create momentum around early successes.

This represents, broadly, what Gartner would do and what I also would recommend. I hope to be able to drill down and offer more specific recommendations in time. 


*I’d bet that other parents like me would appreciate hearing about successful connections, discoveries, pursuits, etc.

A Tale of Two Hope Machines, 8.1.1

HALT !!

DO NOT read The Social Organization if what you’re after is a set of social media “best practices” for improving your online communication and fundraising efforts. DO read, or at least consider reading, Heather Mansfield's Social Media for Social Good. (McGraw-Hill, 2012)

Collaboration? I’m not even sure Ms. Mansfield knows the word. The premise of her book – very different than Gartner’s but not at odds – is that you should use Web 2.0 tools “to complement your Web 1.0 communications and online fundraising strategies.” That's exactly what most nonprofits have been doing the past few years. SM4SG represents the RULES OF THUMB she took away after having observed many of 'em.

UCP has a pretty good handle on those*. Red Treehouse, on the other hand, might really stand to benefit by what she has to offer. Quickly. Whereas the fruits of social media enabled, i.e., Gartner-style, collaboration may be sweeter, these are lower-hanging and easier to access. In fact, social media could well be applied to some of Red Treehouse's current initiatives: 

• Rolling out the website. A blitz marketing campaign that’s ongoing. Could be aided and abetted by Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr, LinkedIn, etc. 

• Asking families, professionals, and organizations to help “spread the word about Red Treehouse by downloading graphics to use on your web site, email, or any other marketing communications.” Red Treehouse could conceivably make it easier for others to share its messaging. Social media (esp. sharing and liking functionalities) has much to offer in this regard.

• Soliciting donations. The same things as above apply to fundraising. Even Twitter's being tried.

And this is to say nothing about all the new ways in which mobile /smartphone technologies are helping nonprofits reach their full potential! More on all of these things, I hope, down the road. 

For now – back to Gartner.

*which isn't to say UCP couldn’t learn a thing or two from the book