nonprofit Archives - Page 2 of 3 - Claxon Communication

Let’s Talk About Love (and Philanthropy)

February 11, 2014 by Erica Barnhart

I have to jump on the Valentine’s Day bandwagon and dedicate this week’s post to love.

2013-08-23 20.46.30-1

You might be wondering what love has to do with your organization. In a few weeks, in our #WordsThatWow series, I’ll post about how using more words of love and gratitude can help your organization in a big way. But today, I want to focus on the language of love.

Love, as it exists in the English language, has the habit of causing some confusion. This is because it covers a wide range of feelings and emotions. You can use the same word to indicate a type of toothpaste you prefer as you would to describe how you feel about the person you have chosen to spend the rest of your life with. Something about that doesn’t seem quite right, don’t you think? And don’t get me started on the confusion it causes in relationships. We’ve gone so far as having to distinguish between “love” and “being in love”. But even that means different things to different people.

The ancient Greeks knew better than to have one word to describe such a range of things. They had at least four separate words to describe different types of love: Spiritual love (agápe), physical love (éros), familial love (storgē), and mental love (philía). Philía is often translated into English as brotherly love or friendship. If this word sounds familiar to you, I’m not surprised. Ever wonder why Philadelphia is the “City of Brotherly Love”? Philía is the root of many other words we use today: Philosophy (love of knowledge), philology (love of learning), and basically any word that ends in –phila or –phile (bibliophile, Anglophile, etc.)

My favorite philía word, however, is philanthropy (love of mankind). If you are part of a philanthropic organization, this may resonate with you as well. We are doing what we are doing because of a love of mankind. When someone makes a donation to our organization, it is because of a love of mankind. We want to make the world a better place because of a love of mankind. And that’s something to keep in mind not just on Valentine’s Day, but every day.

Happy loving, everyone!

Use These Words with Caution – Part 1 [#WordsThatWow]

February 10, 2014 by Erica Barnhart

[This is the next installment in our series explaining each of the words on our 2014 List of Words that Wow. We covered the ‘Never Use’ category. Now were moving into the ‘Use with Caution’ ones. It’s a long list, so we’re going to split this into a few different posts. First up, inspire and impact.]

Inspire: Inspirational quotes flood our Pinterest boards, Facebook walls, and desk calendars. Artists need inspiration to create, entrepreneurs need inspiration to succeed, and many of us need inspiration to feel fulfilled in our lives. Inspiration is a wonderful thing, right?

Absolutely. It’s for this reason that many organizations are excited to use it in their mission statements. “We inspire change.” “We inspire hope.” “We inspire (insert group of people here).” I’m sure you’ve heard all these before.

And these phrases sound nice. But stop and think about them. Is “inspiring change” the best way to convey what your organization does, especially if you only have a few words to do it? This phrase could apply to the vast majority of nonprofits out there. It doesn’t make you stand out, or even sound very interesting. Your words should reflect the awesome and unique organization you are.

If you are adamant about using the word inspire, make sure you are not using it as a means to an end. Nine times out of ten, it’s not enough to simply inspire. Be specific about what you are inspiring people to do (and maybe even how you’re doing it). Show how the inspiration you are causing makes a difference in the world. For example, “We inspire youth to become leaders.” can change to “We inspire youth to question status-quo policies and lead their communities to progressive change.” Sure, it’s a few more words, but it’s a much more memorable and accurate description of your organization.

Impact: Like inspire, impact is a word that doesn’t mean much on its own. Your organization is impacting lives. So what? How are you impacting them? When you answer this question, my guess is that you’ll find you can remove the word impact from the equation completely.

So, the next time you’re about to tell someone that your organization is inspiring change or creating impact, stop a moment. What are you really doing?

Language Lesson: Equity vs. Equality

February 4, 2014 by Erica Barnhart

Equity. Equality. These two words look so similar they could be related. Actually, they are. They both come from the same Latin root word “aequus” meaning “equal”. So, what’s the difference?

At their core, both equity and equality still involve the concept of “equal”. In equity, the outcome is equal. In equality, the means used is equal.

Confused? Don’t worry. This image helps spell it out.

The image to the left is equality. The same thing (in this case, a crate to stand on) was given to each child.

The image right is equity. Each child received a different amount of crates (0-2), but the end result was that all three children had an equal view of the game.

A mistake many causes and organizations make in their writing (mission statements, value statements, grant proposals, donor appeals, etc.) is using equality when they really mean equity. Imagine an organization whose mission is to make quality education accessible to all school-age children in a community. Each child will have their own circumstances, and some will need the organization’s services much more than others. Some may not need it at all. This organization is creating equity, not equality.

In short, equality is sameness, whereas equity is fairness. Remember this the next time you write about your organization’s work. A few letters can change the meaning of your message.

What do you think? Are there circumstances in which an organization really means equality, and not equity?

Consistency, Finding Content, and… Kittens?

January 28, 2014 by Erica Barnhart

This scenario may sound familiar to you: You’re sitting around your office’s conference table, brainstorming topics to put in your organization’s newsletter. You’re coming up with nothing. Nothing seems newsworthy. After a substantial pause in conversation, someone chimes in and says,

“We should only issue a newsletter when we have something important to share.”

On the surface, it seems like an appealing thought. We don’t have meetings unless there’s something to meet about, right? Why write when there’s nothing to write about?

The answer is consistency.

Nonprofit communications expert Kivi Leroux Miller explains, “You want people to remember you and look forward to receiving your newsletter.” The key phrase here is look forward to. They can’t look forward to reading your newsletter if they don’t know when it’s coming. Even if it’s infrequent (Miller suggests you can go as long as once every six weeks), you want to be consistent. Consistency also shows your audience that you are an awesomely organized and reliable organization, and you don’t do things willy-nilly. Added bonus!

Your next question may be: How do we get them to remember us, then, if we don’t have good content? You do have good content, you just have to find it.

There’s tons of advice available online and elsewhere about how to write engaging content. A quick Google search will show you that. But any writer will tell you, when you’re stuck on what to write, you just need to sit down and start writing. You have a lot hidden in your subconscious that doesn’t come out until you sit down and start typing. This technique is known as steam of consciousness. Type whatever comes into your head and don’t stop typing. You’ll end up with some nonsense, but I bet anything you’ll also come up with some great ideas.

If need some extra motivation, use this fun tool called WrittenKitten. For every 100 words you write, you get rewarded with a cute cat picture. It may seem silly, but it works. It’s actually addicting; I finding myself writing more just to see what the next cute little furball will look like. And when I’m done, I’m rewarded again with paragraphs of text filled with ideas.

So give it a try – you have nothing to lose and some extreme adorableness to gain.

mindle

Are you serving up guilt or potential?

March 21, 2012 by Erica Barnhart

As a reader of this blog, you realize the importance (and value) of a well-crafted message. But do you realize the importance of the HOW you package up your message?

There are many angles at our disposal. Our visuals and content can be funny, quirky, upbeat or solemn. It can also be inspirational and even manipulative.

Yup, manipulative. Seen those commercials by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, aka, the ASPCA in the States? The ones with the abused animals looking at you like you’re the only who can save them? The ones that make you sob and reach for the tissues? That’s using guilt to make you reach for your wallet after you’re done with the tissues.

Based on the fact that some organizations continue to spread on the guilt, the guilt perspective must work for them.

Another messaging perspective focuses on potential, using imagery of hope and positive outcomes instead of gut-wrenching pictures and tear-jerking music to inspire audiences to donate. A local Washington animal shelter, PAWS, uses words and visuals that imply we can be part of a beautiful relationship. We’ll get something out of donating or adopting a pet—a warm fuzzy glow or a warm fuzzy friend. Contrast this with the ASPCA who makes it seem like the poor animals will continue a life of filth and abuse if you don’t donate, and it’s all you and your mocha habit’s fault. (Yes, yes, you’re seeing my personal bias come through here.)

Both guilt and potential can drive engagement. Using either also reflects who you are as an organization. Your values and your personality. For better or for worse.

What ultimately inspires people to volunteer and donate can’t be pinned down to one factor–but having a well-defined message helps immensely. And HOW you deliver your message says a lot about what you believe.

Visit these organization’s sites and then rate their messaging below on the Guilt-Potential Continuum!

Quizzes by Quibblo.com | SnapApp Quiz Apps

“Top 5 Words to Avoid” Featured on Kivi’s Nonprofit Communications Blog

February 10, 2012 by Erica Barnhart

Kivi Leroux Miller is one of the leading voices in DIY nonprofit marketing. Her blog, Kivi’s Nonprofit Communications Blog, is full of practical, do-now tips for do-gooders.

Two weeks ago on her main site, Kivi wrote a piece on the pitfalls of wordiness in messaging and how to fix lengthy writing habits. I got down in the word weeds with a guest post outlining the top five words to avoid in your messaging.

Learn why these words should be booted from your messaging vocabulary:

Provide

Just

Trying

Self-sufficiency

Thriving Communities

Pick the one you use too much and then take the One Less Word Challenge. How will you replace it?

Adjective Adjustment: 3 Rules of Thumb

January 30, 2012 by Erica Barnhart

Eye-catching adjectives (and adverbs) can enliven an otherwise ho-hum hunk of copy. But you have to be careful how you use them. If you overuse them, you risk irritating or boring your reader. They are, after all, extra words and each word takes time to read, so you have to make each word worth their while.

To help you avoid adjective awkwardness, here are three Rules of Thumb for effectively using adjectives in mission-driven messaging.

Keep Calls to Action (CTAs) adjective-free: There’s a reason ‘Donate Now’, ‘Sign-up Today’, and other short CTAs work. They get right to the point. Go with it.
No trash: If you can get the point across without the adjective, do it. Otherwise, you risk gunking up your copy. This is especially true for shorter pieces (FB posts, Tweets, etc.) and CTAs (see #1 above). Example: “We helped protect 1,000 acres of precious wetlands.” Knowing they’re precious doesn’t make much of a difference. It mainly makes you wonder what un-precious wetlands are. Make sure it adds value to the point. Otherwise, delete.
Don’t be boring: When an adjective can help you grab someone’s attention–e.g. subject lines–pick something that will stand out. Avoid overused adjectives like thriving, successful and amazing. We expect to see these words so we don’t really see them. It’s wasted space. Pick adjectives that evoke emotion or speak to the reader’s senses. There are approximately 100,000 adjectives in the English language. Find one that adds some zing to your thing!

This is a mash-up from a variety of sources. If you want to dig deeper, I recommend Roger Dooley’s Neuromarketing blog and Jason Cohen’s post 10 Secrets to More Magnetic Copy on Copyblogger.

Cause & Mission: Big Diff

January 18, 2012 by Erica Barnhart

You often see ’cause’ and ‘mission’ used interchangeably. Not sure why. They’re quite different.

Here’s what I mean:

Cause=Why

Mission=What/Who/How

Causes can be broad (example: improving public education) or specific (example: music education in elementary schools in East Vancouver). Importantly, multiple organizations share a cause. This makes sense. We’re tackling big problems and it’s going to take lots of people-power to make progress on them. One organization isn’t going to single-handedly improve public education, right?

Mission is about your WHAT/WHO/HOW. This should speak to how you are advancing your cause, whether you’re an individual or an organization.

WHAT do you do?

WHO are you helping?

HOW are you doing it?

Each of these questions need a specific answer that, as a whole, is unique to your organization. And I mean ‘unique’ in the true sense of the word: something of which there is only one.

Share your cause. Own your mission.

Does this make sense? Do you know the difference between your cause and your mission?

The Inspiration Sector

August 22, 2011 by Erica Barnhart

It has always irked me that our sector is defined by what it is not, i.e. the ‘non’ profit sector. Even more irkesome is when you go back to the roots of the word profit, which Dan Pallotta does in his book Uncharitable, and realize ‘profit’ means ‘progress’. So we’re the non-progress sector. Hmmm.

Last time I checked, we were very much about progress. Progress on education, poverty eradication, sustainability, public health, the arts. You name it, we’re pretty much in it to make progress that will lead to a healthier planet with happier people living on it. It’s pretty audacious to think we can achieve this type of progress given how challenging the issues are that we’re tackling. Like President Obama, we have the audacity of hope.

I think this type of audacity is inspiring.

Many alternatives to ‘non profit’ have been floated–third sector, social change sector, social sector. [And as Chanelle Carver pointed out in the comments below, there’s a logical extention of Hildy Gottlieb‘s concept of Community Benefit Organizations to Community Benefit Sector. Thanks Chanelle for making this connection!)

I’d like to add an alternative to the list: the Inspiration Sector. (And, if someone else has already floated this, then I’d like to second the submission!)

I realize it’d take time for us to adjust to an entirely new name and that there are pragmatic implications (think of all that web copy we’d need to update!), but I, for one, would love to wake up every day and say, “I’m off to work in the Inspiration Sector!”

Want work in the Inspiration Sector with me?

Engaging in diffusion, differentiation and dissonance

February 11, 2011 by Erica Barnhart

This Wednesday, I had the pleasure of being in the room with some of Seattle’s leading thinkers on all things nonprofit, philanthropic and do-good-y. How’d I get so lucky? Well, late last year, me and my colleagues Peter Drury and Zan McColloch-Lussier kicked off something called The Lab. We decided it was high-time that super-smart do-gooders had an opportunity to think deep thoughts that would lead to great action.

The first time we met, we talked about listening. This week, we talked about engagement. We picked this topic because listening leads logically to engagement and yet the word engagement seems to mean a whole lotta things to a whole lotta people. Given its meteoric rise to ubiquity, we decided it was important to come to a shared understanding of this popular word (lest it end up on the Banished Words List!).

There were more good points and astute observations than you could waggle a mission statement at during our two hours together–these were my three favs:

Diffusion: Technology makes it easier to engage. This is great in many ways; it also means individuals are bombarded with engagement opportunities. So, although it is technically easier to engage, it is more difficult to get people to engage because their attention is drawn in so many directions. Don’t let ease of access trick you into believing engagement is easy.
Differentiation: Arcs, spectrums, ladders, pyramids. Whatever you call it, organizations benefit from thinking about how to differentiate their engagement opportunities by audience and then getting clear on how engagement leads to more engagement for each group. Be explicit. Be specific. Then you know where you want which folks to go and they know where they’re going. Happy, happy.
Dissonance: We agreed that engagement is a two-way street, that both parties derive mutual benefit from engaging and have skin in the game. Engagement is active. All well and good. And yet organizations and individuals usually seek different benefits from the engagement. Or at least that would seem the case. Unless, of course, you can stay focused on the benefit you both care about: advancing mission. It was fascinating to see how this end-user vs. organizational-initiator dynamic played out in the conversation. Rigorous focus on mission mitigates dissonance.

To get more highlights and tidbits from the convo, check out #nplab on Twitter. Also, check out Zan’s great summary here. And last, but certainly not least, see what Beth Kanter (yep, THE Beth Kanter!) had to say about engagement when we interviewed her at Tech for Good, where she delivered a totally amazing training.

How do you like to engage and be engaged? How does your organization engage? What does ‘engagement’ mean to you?