In late 2005, the dotOrganize team embarked on an unprecedented effort to map the current state of online technology in the social change sector. Over nine months, dotOrganize gathered survey and interview input from more than 400 social change groups, technology providers, and nonprofit technology capacity builders. Surveys and interviews were designed to identify what organizers need to support their goals, what tools are currently available, what does and does not work, and what’s needed to strengthen the long-term capacity of the sector.

Great effort was made to obtain input from organizations with smaller budgets: 75% of organizations surveyed operate on annual budgets of $1 million or less; 29% on budgets under $100,000.

The full report provides a detailed view of the sector’s present situation, gives voice to the organizers who are struggling with these issues, and offers recommendations for filling current gaps in strategy, software development, and tool adoption paths.

Summary of Key Findings

• Enthusiasm and Wide-Ranging Interest
  Social change organizers are extremely enthusiastic about the potential of online tools: 95% indicate that they believe technology is important or essential to achieving their mission.
• Frustration with Current Capacity and Tools
  59% of those surveyed report being frustrated or really struggling with their current technology. A surprising number of organizations lack the capacity to employ some of the most standard online organizing techniques — 39% do not use email newsletters and 47% do not accept donations online.
• The Heart of the Problem: Data Disarray
  Inadequate data management emerged as a major impediment to effective organizing. One of the areas hardest hit by this data disarray is contact management, or the tracking of people and relationships. More than half of survey respondents report using slips of paper, Excel spreadsheets, and personal address books to manage organizational contacts. Organizations across the budget spectrum experience similar difficulties. In the absence of infrastructure to manage information about constituents and communities, organizers cannot engage and serve them in the most productive ways.
• Predictors (or Not….) of Technology Success
  The number of dedicated technology staff in an organization, rather than size of budget, emerged as the most stable predictor of technology success.
• Lack of Time, Money, and Expertise Prevents Adoption of New Tools
  Regardless of organization size, organizers across the board report that money (57%), time (45%), and lack of staff expertise (34%) prevent their organizations from taking full advantage of databases and online tools.
• Technology Struggles Stunt Impact
  Organizations are struggling to master standard and emerging technology, as well as to manage data silos and ill-suited tools. These challenges result in lost time, missed civic engagement opportunities, lost money, and poorly-informed decisions. For example, 55% of survey respondents report not keeping email lists at all, and a majority have email lists with fewer than 1,000 supporters.

Full Findings Analysis »

Summary of Key Recommendations

We believe there is no single solution for overcoming the technology obstacles outlined above. Rather, the sector requires a comprehensive, interrelated approach that helps organizations develop smart strategies and effectively implement technologies that support those strategies. Following are excerpts from the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the full report.

• Define Best Practices for Online Organizing
  Because “online organizing” is such a new medium, the body of knowledge about successful strategies is limited. The sector requires an organized set of technology-neutral case studies, best practices, success stories, and performance benchmarks. How do we define success? How can online tools support our campaign and program objectives?
• Enhance Strategic Support and Information Resource
  In order to support their objectives with appropriate technology solutions, organizations need access to comprehensive online information resources (including a searchable tools databases, tool recommendations, user ratings, and a repository of user-generated best practices and implementation guidelines). Some attempts have been made to centralize this kind of information in the nonprofit technology sector, but the results are often not helpful to non-tech savvy organizers.
• New Models of Software Development
  Once an online strategy is defined, the right tool will make or break that strategy. At the same time, a groundbreaking tool can often drive the strategy in ways previously unimagined. Appropriate, reliable tools rest at the heart of what’s possible. Technology needs among organizers are too varied to render any single tool suite a viable sector-wide solution. “Ecosystems” of software that share data and build on each other’s strengths, rather than stand-alone applications that seek to be all things to all organizations, are most likely to succeed. Specifically, nurturing a tighter integration between robust contact management tools and online engagement tools (email management, online fundraising, online advocacy) can address some of the data management woes currently experienced by the majority of the sector.
• Support Adoption of On-Demand Software
  The on-demand model affords organizers access to tools hosted online by Application Service Providers (ASPs). In the nonprofit sector, where organizations rarely have in-house technical staff or resources for an independent technology consultant, this model can be of great value.
• Prioritize Documentation, Ongoing Support, and Training
  Social change-oriented software projects need to be approached with a full adoption path in mind. Even the best online tools enjoy only short-lived success if they are delivered without adequate documentation, reliable technical support, or a means for accommodating ongoing feature enhancements.
• Increase Offerings to the Full Spectrum of Social Change Groups
  Many organizations don’t have the money to invest in online tools, period. Moreover, volunteer-run groups, who do not posses nonprofit tax status, are some of the most influential and potentially effective contributors to progressive social change. They are organizing with their neighbors, in their communities, and they require support as much as foundation-sponsored organizations. As a sector, we need to create funding and service strategies that deliver technology to under-resourced and volunteer-run organizations.

Full Conclusions and Recommendations »

The Wrap

Organizers are clearly struggling, despite their general enthusiasm for technology tools. Regardless of budget size, they feel strapped for time, money, and know-how. They believe that their software lacks the features they need, that they lack the training and support to use the software, and they’re frustrated by the lack of integration between existing tools.

Fortunately, the world of organizing and technology is ripe for change. Social change organizers have adopted enough new technology to know what works, what’s missing, and most importantly, that the Web holds tremendous untapped potential. Organizers understand that online organizing tools can dramatically increase their capacity, and are demanding the know-how and tools to progress along that path.

Our current challenge rests in responding to organizers’ growing enthusiasm with intelligent ways to leverage our limited resources for maximum collective impact. With constant advances in technology, the question becomes less about the limits of online tools themselves, but rather how we craft development, delivery, and adoption strategies to make them as useful as possible for organizers.

This report compiles insights from more than 400 social change groups, technology providers, and nonprofit technology capacity builders, examining the needs of organizers working to utilize new technologies, and offering recommendations for how to meet those needs more effectively.

While organizers have begun to harness some of the Web’s amazing power over the past five years, our research shows that they are still struggling in their effort to make use of new and emerging technologies.

They’re excited about the possibilities, but are unable to take advantage of them. Regardless of size and financial situation, they feel strapped for time, money, and know-how. They feel that their software lacks the features they need, that they lack the training and support to use the software, and they’re frustrated by the lack of integration between tools.

As a sector, we can make this situation better.

This report investigates ways to respond to these obstacles with enduring, community-driven solutions.

Ultimately, the dotOrganize project targets the technology needs of social change organizers working in grassroots groups, larger nonprofits, or as individual change agents. dotOrganize aims to assist these organizers in identifying and utilizing online tools as vehicles for their vision. The project also endeavors to support technology vendors, technology consultants, and funders in their efforts to serve organizers.

Many of the terms below carry conflicting or disputed meanings. The definitions provided here are intended as guidelines within the context of this report.

• Social Change Organization: For the purposes of this report, we refer to social change organizations as those that promote progressive social change. These groups may endeavor to serve or give voice to an underrepresented constituency or community, or they may advocate on behalf of a specific issue. Although social change organizations may work on large or small budgets, a majority of the social change groups represented in this report are small, under-resourced, and sparsely staffed.Some examples of groups that fall outside our working definition of social change organizations are trade groups, professional associations, social service providers without advocacy or organizing initiatives, charitable foundations, and groups advancing politically conservative agendas.
• Organizing: This term can mean different things to different communities. Organizing can refer to the process of base building and strengthening social movements by working with people in affected communities to define their objectives, and co-creating a strategy to achieve those objectives. Other organizing models focus more on engaging people outside of affected communities to support an issue or campaign. Yes, there is a tension between the two. Organizing activities, no matter the tactical model, can include education, outreach, power mapping, advocacy, civil disobedience, long-term relationship building, and targeting decision makers to affect policy.
• Online Organizing: We define “online organizing” as the use of Internet communication technologies to support the full spectrum of organizing. In practice, use of this term often assumes a clean split between offline organizing and online organizing techniques. It is our view that they work in tandem. Online technology has certainly added many tools to organizer toolboxes, such as communicating to extended networks of people through email, providing materials for download via a website, or targeting mass communications to a legislator. However, these means often lead to the same ends intended by an offline organizing strategy. If online tactics aren’t closely linked with offline tactics, in service of a stated strategy, they’re probably not that effective. Legitimate outcomes cannot, by definition, be limited to the “online world.”
• Organizer: An individual active in advancing an organizational agenda utilizing a range of on- and offline organizing techniques. Organizers prioritize building networks and relationships, cultivating a long-term power base, and activating a community or constituency around a particular issue. Organizers may also focus on broader communications efforts, developing systemic analyses, and providing information to the general public.
• Information Management: The practice of tracking and handling information acquired from one or many sources in a way that optimizes access by all who have a share in that information.
• Information/Systems Integration: The seamless movement of information from one application to another. Many of the applications in use today were developed using arcane and proprietary technologies, thus creating information silos within organizations. When different systems can’t integrate effectively, they create information bottlenecks that result in data duplication and increased data entry.

The social change organizing sector is largely comprised of passionate people working hard to better our communities, our institutions, and our society at large. In a world rife with systemic problems, organizers work diligently to respond to these challenges in effective ways.

Organizers rely on many different tools to support their work, and the Web has emerged as one of the most promising vehicles for supporting their efforts to create lasting, substantial change.

Many inspiring examples of organizing efforts that utilize online tools have emerged over the past five years, and the potential for this medium remains largely untapped. As a movement, our current challenge rests in responding to this potential and organizers’ growing enthusiasm with intelligent ways to leverage our limited resources for maximum collective impact.

Maximum impact requires a proactive shift towards technology that empowers the sector by improving the experience and efficiency of social change organizers who struggle with poorly integrated and supported tools. Empowerment demands that we put targeted information within reach of organizers, encourage community-driven software development, and strengthen essential training networks.

Historically, the enthusiasm and agility of the social change sector has enabled it to make tremendous progress with minimal infrastructure. We now have an opportunity to harness an optimized organizing infrastructure – current online tools enable organizations to build a stronger base, expand networks, raise funds, respond faster to crisis, manage events, make project coordination more collaborative, and encourage grassroots participation.

As constant advances in technology motivate and surprise us, the question becomes less about the limits of technology itself, but rather how we choose to use it, and how we make it a more accessible tool for organizers.

In order to harness the potential of new and emerging technologies, organizers need access to a comprehensive base of knowledge and resources. In contributing to this capacity-building effort, dotOrganize aims to accomplish actionable short-term goals while fostering a long-term vision of a strong social change sector.

The ultimate goal of this report is to help organizers harness the potential of online technology. To this end, we have compiled insights from organizers working to utilize new technology and provided introductory recommendations for technology developers, capacity builders, strategists, practitioners and funders. From a tools perspective, the research presented in this report focuses on the nexus of contact management, online communication, and online organizing tools, which we have broadly defined as:

• Contact management tools permit organizations to track their constituents or service communities. A rolodex is the simplest form of contact management; slightly more advanced is a spreadsheet. Beyond that, there are a variety of more complex programs serving different purposes, such as donor tracking, volunteer management, and relationship management.
• Online communications tools send information from one online computing device to another. This broad category encompasses email and email-blast tools, blogs, and online event calendars.
• Online organizing tools permit organizations to conduct aspects of their campaigns and advocacy efforts online. Examples include online volunteer recruitment, online fundraising, and email advocacy.

Largely designed as separate applications, contact management and Web-based communication and organizing tools are now becoming increasingly integrated. For example, constituent lists organizers previously tracked through offline databases such as FileMaker Pro or Access can now be tracked online and linked automatically to email-blast functionality. Software developments such as these, which seamlessly integrate tracking power and communication technologies, offer organizers ways to streamline their work, strengthen systems, and communicate more effectively with constituents.

There are many other technologies and services, such as hardware, network administration, desktop publishing software, financial management systems, and front or back office technical support, which are crucially important to social change organizers. However, information about how organizers are using these types of technologies and services are beyond the scope of this report.

• In-depth, qualitative interviews with 20 organizations. The interview consisted of approximately 20 questions focusing on organizational metrics, technological capacity and requirements, approaches to strategic communications, and database needs. The open interview structure enabled respondents to use set questions as points of departure to explore and expand on a variety of issues.
• The dotOrganize survey, which included 34 questions organized in six sections: 1) organizational profile; 2) tools needed; 3) data management practices; 4) current level and approach to data integration; 5) technology habits and resources; and 6) election-related activities, with an additional area for open-ended comments.
• Directory of available online tools and resources. Part of our research involved identifying what tools organizers currently use, what works for them, and what’s missing. We began the process of compiling tools and resources from multiple sources, including publicly available wikis from conferences and gatherings, previous lists compiled by peer networks and capacity builders, audited nonprofit technology-specific email lists, the aforementioned interviews and survey, and the collective experience of the dotOrganize staff.Because evolving technology quickly renders static lists obsolete, we decided to develop a dynamic online directory open to community participation. We used our initial tools compilation to seed the content, and we hope you’ll make it even more relevant by adding the tools you use, in addition to your reviews and ratings.

dotOrganize solicited participants from diverse nonprofit listserves and blogs, as well as through colleagues and allies. Respondents included executive directors, campaign directors, and organizers. Although the online format of the survey encouraged responses from organizations possessing basic online access, respondents included those identifying as “online organizers” as well as those using more traditional, offline organizing methods.

Respondents ranged from volunteer-run peace action groups to organizations working on youth civic engagement to national environmental groups with annual budgets well over $5 million. However, dotOrganize deliberately solicited responses from social change organizing groups working with smaller budgets and fewer staff.

Demographic responses show that:

• Survey respondents work across the spectrum of social change issues, including education (35%), the environment (30%), healthcare (34%), youth issues (29%), and economic justice (21%).
• 30% of respondents operate on a budget of $100,000 or under, and 60% operate on a budget of $500,000 or under.
• Respondents tend to have a relatively small number of paid staff. 67% employ 10 or fewer paid staff members, and a full 15% are run entirely by volunteers.

Click Image to Enlarge

• Social change organizers are largely enthusiastic about the potential of online tools and view technology as extremely important to achieving their organizations’ missions.

• Because organizations’ online needs and operational goals run the gamut, no one tool or tool suite can completely fill the technology gap. However, the most popular tools, or the tools that a majority of respondents report using or needing, fall into the communications and fundraising categories.

Obstacles to Harnessing Online Potential

• Most organizations, whether three-person start-ups or 3 million-person coalitions, are struggling to keep their constituent databases in order, and as a result have difficulty embracing new and emerging technologies (such as blogs, social networking, SMS/text messaging, GIS mapping, and wikis).

• 59% report being frustrated or really struggling with technology.

• A surprising number of organizations indicate they lack the capacity to employ some of the most standard online organizing techniques — 39% do not use email newsletters and 47% do not accept donations online.

• Regardless of the size of the organization, organizers across the board reported that money (57%), time (45%), and lack of staff expertise (34%) prevent their organizations from taking full advantage of databases and online tools.

Data Disarray: The Great Equalizer

• Inadequate data management emerged as a major impediment to effective organizing. More than half the respondents report using slips of paper, Excel spreadsheets, and personal address books to manage organizational data.

• Organizations across the budget spectrum experience a similar lack of data integration in their systems. The ability to share data across platforms and between applications, such as contact databases and Web content management systems, reduces data duplication and errors, as well as time spent on manual data entry and manually synching data repositories. Only 7% of respondents report that their current systems share data easily.

• Organizers also stress the significance of data integration in their daily operations. On a scale of 1-10, with 10 representing the greatest importance of data integration to their work, nearly 70% of respondents chose ratings between 7-10, signifying that a vast majority consider integration to be both a key obstacle and solution.

Predictors (or Not….) of Technology Success

• The number of dedicated technology staff in an organization emerged as the most stable predictor of technology success. Respondents with a higher number of dedicated technology staff tend to be less frustrated than respondents with fewer dedicated staff.

• Although larger annual budgets had a positive impact on respondents’ attitudes toward technology, funding is not a panacea for technology woes. For example, organizations that spent the least on software and online tools were just as likely to be satisfied, on average, as those that spent the most.

The Real Costs of the Technology Struggle

• Social change organizations are struggling to master standard and emerging technology, as well as to manage data silos and ill-suited tools. These challenges, which drain resources away from serving their communities and constituents, result in lost time, missed civic engagement opportunities, lost money, and poorly-informed decisions. For example, a comprehensive and flexible list of supporters is a core tool for organizing; yet, this tool remains drastically underutilized. 55% of respondents report that they don’t keep email lists at all, and a majority have email lists of fewer than 1,000 supporters.

The Good News

Fortunately, the world of organizing and technology is ripe for change. Social change organizers have adopted enough new technology to know what works, what’s missing, and most importantly, that the Web holds tremendous untapped potential. Organizers understand that online organizing tools can dramatically increase their capacity, and are demanding the know-how and tools to progress along that path.

Concurrently, trends in Web-based software development have created an ideal climate for collaboration and innovation. Open source development models make software code available for others to view, amend, adapt, and implement with minimal licensing fees. Open Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) enable separate applications to work with each other, and on-demand software, such as Salesforce.com or Democracy in Action, enables users to access tools that are hosted and maintained online. On-demand access is lessening the need for in-house technical staff and making a wider array of tools accessible and affordable for organizers.

A promising convergence is now on the horizon, as organizers embrace online technology and those technologies gain the diversity and flexibility needed to support this sector.

“We love [technology], but are frustrated that the perfectly integrated system does not exist for us.”"We have the tools, but not enough time to master and get the most out of them.”

Organizers responded emphatically when asked about technology’s relevance to their goals. 95% indicate that they believe technology is important or essential to achieving their mission. In addition:

• More than 40% of respondents see technology as essential to their work, and have embraced it as the wave of the future.
• The remaining respondents (excluding the 5% who hate it or have no use for it) believe technology is important, but feel uninformed and/or frustrated about what they need or how to get it.
• When asked what prevented them from taking advantage of databases and online organizing tools, only 5% cited “staff distrust or discomfort with technology” as a primary factor, indicating that other obstacles, to be discussed in later sections, stand in the way of technology adoption.
• The expansion of Internet adoption in social change organizations most likely reflects expansion amongst the general population. According to a recent Pew study, Internet penetration among U.S. adults has hit an all-time high: a full 73% of respondents (about 147 million adults) are Internet users, which is up from 35% only six years ago.

It is important to note, however, that despite this increase, access for all — especially high-speed broadband access — is still not assured. The federal government has eliminated regulations intended to ensure universal access to communications networks, while city and state-level infrastructure plans are being turned over to private companies with few service obligations.

While comprehensive online access for all communities continues to be an issue of tremendous concern, the high percentage of social change organizations with an appetite for new technologies reflects national trends, and indicates organizers are embracing both the challenge and the opportunity of technology.

Capacity-building agencies, software developers, and technology strategists have been working to help organizations understand and embrace new tools. Evidence of their success shows in the high number of respondents who see technology as essential to their mission, and the low number reporting staff distrust or discomfort with technology.

Technology needs differed across organizations, and thus no one tool completely governs the market. Beyond Microsoft’s Excel, Outlook and Access, users are spread out unevenly across more than 40 applications, with the majority of applications claiming no more than 5–15 organizations. However, nine out of the top 10 most used or needed tools fell in the communications and fundraising categories, suggesting these to be the most fruitful areas for technology and resource development.

Table 2 and Table 3 provide an overview of respondents’ attitudes toward an array of tools: those they currently use, those they need, those they don’t understand, and those they don’t want.

Technology Fundamentals Remain Elusive

Despite believing in the importance of technology to their missions, a surprising number of organizations are not taking advantage of basic online organizing techniques, such as collecting email addresses, sending out mass emails, posting news and information on websites, providing materials for download, and processing donations online.

These fundamental technologies have been available for many years, a majority of the online public uses them, and they are widely regarded as producing enough value to be worth the initial investment. However, survey responses show that:

• 39% of respondents still don’t use email newsletters.
• 47% still don’t accept donations online.
• 43% would like to, but are not providing materials for download.
• Only a small percentage of respondents are using newer Web 2.0 tools such as Podcasting (3%), public wikis (4%), and social networking tools or SMS/text messaging (9%).

Click Images to Enlarge