What happens when an organisation chooses not to engage?

I’ve been following unfolding of the excellent We Are Media project which is a community of people from nonprofits coming together curated by NTEN who are interested in learning and teaching about how social media strategies and tools can enable nonprofit organisations to create, compile, and distribute their stories and change the world. Working together the network aims to help identify and point to the best how-to guides and useful resources that cover all aspects of creating, aggregating, and distributing social media. The resulting curriculum will be live on the We Are Media wiki and will also cover important organisational adoption issues, strategy, ROI analysis, as well as the tools.

In the latest module, they are looking at the Return of Investment (ROI) of social media. In Beth Kanter’s recent post exploring where are the best resources to guide our thinking about Social Media Metrics, ROI, and Nonprofits?; Beth rounds up some great examples and opens up a discussion on measuring the benefits and also, if and how you can quantify the return.

Beth Dunn, another of my favourite bloggers and a contributor for the project and she’s recently posted an article ROI: the null hypothesis, which explores what happens when an organisation chooses not to engage; when they decide to play it ‘safe.’
In her article she raises a compelling argument looking at the risks to organisations that are not engaged in social media to reach out to their supporters, members and users.

Finally, over on this side of the pond, Steve Bridger has shared the presentation he recently delivered to staff at Action Aid, entitled “does it mean we have to change our jobs?”. The presentation summarises many of the issues that charities face in choosing whether to participate and how they can make the best use of social media and gives examples of ‘connected’ charities too.

Charities & The Social Web

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: groundswell agile)