What effective npcomm teams get right
•
0 likes•596 views
Slides from Kivi's workshop presentation at Create Good 2017 in Durham, NC 4/17/2017
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to What effective npcomm teams get right
Similar to What effective npcomm teams get right (20)
More from Kivi Leroux Miller
More from Kivi Leroux Miller (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
What effective npcomm teams get right
- 1. What the Most Effective Nonprofit Communications Teams Do Right (And What Everyone Else Gets Wrong) Kivi Leroux Miller Founder and CEO Nonprofit Marketing Guide @npmktgd @kivilm #npcomm
- 2. Daily blog, weekly e-newsletter, and helpful downloads. Free. All-Access Training Pass with frequent webinars, feedback and fine-tuning sessions, Q & A panels, marketing time-savers, private Facebook community, and other exclusives. Pay monthly or annually. Nonprofit Marketing Accelerators. Six-week intensive coaching programs where you decide the strategy, do the work, and deliver the goods. New topic each quarter. Communications Director Mentoring Program. The ultimate six- month professional development program for nonprofit communications directors. January–June and July-December sessions.
- 3. In the next two hours . . . • Discuss what NPCOMM effectiveness looks like • Take a few assessments, and compare your results to national data • Review comms team models that support increased effectiveness
- 6. When people say that MONEY RAISED is the ONLY measure of effective nonprofit communications.
- 7. Effectiveness is the ability to produce a desired result.
- 8. Let’s Start with the “Desired Results”
- 9. Team effectiveness – not just busyness – is what creates results.
- 10. Honey is your nonprofit MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. The flavor depends on your goals. https://www.flickr.com/photos/69872692@N07/6867963316
- 11. Major Donors Small – Medium Donors Fundraising Events Recruiting Volunteers Recruiting Members Raising Awareness of Issues Internal Comms Thought Leadership Brand and Reputation Management Engaging Community Recruiting Participants Advocating on Issues
- 12. Major Donors Small – Medium Donors Raising Awareness of Issues Internal Comms Thought Leadership Brand and Reputation Management Engaging Community Recruiting Participants Fundraising Events Recruiting Volunteers Recruiting Members Advocating on Issues
- 14. 14 Effectiveness Can Be Hard to Measure.
- 15. 4 Approaches to Measuring Effectiveness When You Can’t Easily Measure Against Your Goals
- 16. Simple 5-Star Rating Get Out Your WORKSHEET
- 17. We asked nonprofits to rank their communications effectiveness on a 5-star scale, from 1 star (not at all effective) to 5 stars (extremely effective). The average was 3.3 stars, or between somewhat and very effective. OverallEffectiveness @npmktgd #npcomm2017
- 18. Marketing Maturity Assessment Extent to which #NPCOMM best practices are used
- 19. 1 – Unaware. We are unfamiliar with this practice. 2 – Aware. We have basic knowledge of this practice. 3 – Ready. We are ready to begin implementing this practice. 4 – Capable. We’ve started implementing this practice and are gaining experience. 5 – Skilled. We are confident in our implementation of this practice. 6 – Expert. We are consistently outstanding in our implementation of this practice. 7 – Authority. We are a thought leader and innovator on this practice. The Marketing Maturity ScaleMarketingMaturity Get Out Your WORKSHEET
- 20. Marketing Maturity Indicator Average Defining specific target audiences or core constituencies, rather than communicating to “everyone” or the “general public.” 4 Segmenting email and print mailing lists, and targeting advertising, so that people see content from you that is highly relevant to them. 3 Creating content centered on the recipient, including clear calls to action, and often using the second person (you, your). 4 Using a consistent and recognizable voice, style, and tone throughout your communications. 4 Regularly incorporating visual content such as photos, video, and graphics into your communications, rather than relying on text alone. 5 @npmktgd#npcomm2017
- 21. Marketing Maturity Indicator Average Using an editorial calendar that says what messaging is going out when and in which communications channels. 4 Building content curation and repurposing into your editorial process, rather than always creating original content from scratch. 4 Managing your website within a Content Management System (CMS) that multiple people on staff know how to update. 4 Managing your mailing list with a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) tool or database that allows you to track information, interactions and activities for each individual on your list. 4 Establishing and measuring key performance indicators for your primary communications goals and channels. 3 TOTAL 39 @npmktgd#npcomm2017
- 22. Effectiveness Star Ranking 1 2 3 4 5 Marketing Maturity Score 24 29 37 44 50 There were no significant differences between nonprofits with different missions on either the Effectiveness Ranking or the Marketing Maturity Scores. Overall Effectiveness and Marketing Maturity Scores Match Up Well
- 24. CALM Assessment How well you manage daily #NPCOMM and productivity challenges Get Out Your WORKSHEET
- 25. #CALMnotBUSY Always Be CALM Collaborative, Agile, Logical, and Methodical not BUSY Bogus, Unrealistic, Sidestepping, andYoked
- 27. A is for AGILE
- 28. L is for LOGICAL
- 30. ManagingDailyChallenges @npmktgd #npcomm2017 GREAT NEWS: Collaboration Improved. Most nonprofits said that collaboration within their communications teams, and with fundraising and program staff, got better in 2016.
- 31. ManagingDailyChallenges @npmktgd #npcomm2017 GREAT NEWS: Editorial Planning Works. Nonprofits with effective communications are three times as likely to use an editorial calendar as those who say their communications are ineffective. Effective communicators are also twice as likely to invest significant time into editorial planning as ineffective ones.
- 32. ManagingDailyChallenges @npmktgd #npcomm2017 GOOD NEWS: Relationships with Executive Directors are Strong. 52% of the most effective communications teams report exceptional relationships with their executive directors, with just 4% calling the management relationship difficult. Conversely, only 17% of ineffective teams report an exceptional relationship, and 30% say it’s difficult.
- 33. ManagingDailyChallenges @npmktgd #npcomm2017 GOOD NEWS: Work Processes Improved. Clarity about communications responsibilities and procedures, and the ability to experiment, improved in 2016 for about a third of nonprofits. Half said these stayed the same.
- 34. ManagingDailyChallenges @npmktgd #npcomm2017 TERRIBLE NEWS: Inability to Focus on Priorities. Over 40% of nonprofits said that focusing on a limited set of priorities, urgent tasks overtaking important ones, and limiting interruptions in their work days all got worse in 2016. Few nonprofits reported improvements in these areas.
- 35. ManagingDailyChallenges @npmktgd #npcomm2017 Start Here to Improve Your Day-to-Day CALM Effectiveness 1. Increase collaboration between communications and fundraising staff 2. Improve clarity about responsibilities and authority over the communications work 3. Ensure that strategic thinking is driving the communications work 4. Increase collaboration between communications and program staff 5. Build management trust in the expertise of communications staff 6. Clarify the processes and procedures for how the communications work gets done
- 36. Job Confidence and Satisfaction Likelihood the org will benefit from experience and expertise Get Out Your WORKSHEET
- 37. ManagingDailyChallenges @npmktgd #npcomm2017 Confidence in Job Skills is Up; Job Satisfaction is Down 2015 2016 Have a lot to learn and many knowledge and experience gaps to fill. 10% 8% Comfortable with most of the work, but want to keep getting better. 53% 47% Very capable, confident, and effective. 37% 45% CONFIDENCE TOTAL (Comfortable + Very Capable) 90% 92% 2015 2016 Satisfied or Very Satisfied 72% 66%
- 38. 38 The Relationship Between Team Structures and Communications Effectiveness
- 39. GREAT SOLUTION: INTEGRATED TEAMS merge multiple goals and jointly plant the flag. https://www.flickr.com/photos/naql/14336138390
- 40. • 20% of Teams • Prioritizes small-medium donors, major donors, and events more than others • Most collaborative model • Great model for nonprofits raising money from individuals • Works well where fundraising is primary goal for external communications.
- 41. GREAT SOLUTION: CENTRALIZED TEAMS coordinate and prioritize multiple goals so the focus is on the right place at any given time. https://www.flickr.com/photos/schmollmolch/13747167545
- 42. • 20% of Teams • Prioritizes small-medium donors, major donors, and events more than others • Most collaborative model • Great model for nonprofits raising money from individuals • Works well where fundraising is primary goal for external communications. • 18% of Teams • Great model when funding comes from grants, fees, and/or major donors • Good with tight partnership with a “separate but equal” development department (e.g. advocacy-driven comms & development) • Most confident in skills.
- 43. INTERNAL AGENCY TEAMS take orders from across the organization and try to produce a consistent product. https://www.flickr.com/photos/rusty_clark/10565697705
- 44. • 20% of Teams • Prioritizes small-medium donors, major donors, and events more than others • Most collaborative model • Great model for nonprofits raising money from individuals • Works well where fundraising is primary goal for external communications. • 18% of Teams • Great model when funding comes from grants, fees, and/or major donors • Good with tight partnership with a “separate but equal” development department (e.g. advocacy-driven comms & development) • Most confident in skills. • 18% of Teams • Tend to be bigger teams at very large nonprofits • Brand managers • “Content mill” for other departments • Full of skilled specialists, but they do not drive strategy
- 45. CEO-LED TEAMS try to hold on as the executive changes speed and direction. https://www.flickr.com/photos/rusty_clark/5846933657
- 46. • 20% of Teams • Prioritizes small-medium donors, major donors, and events more than others • Most collaborative model • Great model for nonprofits raising money from individuals • Works well where fundraising is primary goal for external communications. • 18% of Teams • Great model when funding comes from grants, fees, and/or major donors • Good with tight partnership with a “separate but equal” development department (e.g. advocacy-driven comms & development) • Most confident in skills. • 18% of Teams • Tend to be bigger teams at very large nonprofits • Brand managers • “Content mill” for other departments • Full of skilled specialists, but they do not drive strategy • 19% of Teams • Tend to be smaller, understaffed teams (most often just one person) • More likely to focus on PR and events • Most scattered; not as strategic • Least confident in skills
- 47. Ranked Themselves as Very or Extremely Effective in 2016 (4 or 5 stars) 50% 42% 28% 24%
- 48. Ranked Themselves as Very or Extremely Effective in 2016 (4 or 5 stars) 50% 42% 28% 24% Average Marketing Maturity Score 41 40 39 36
- 49. Ranked Themselves as Very or Extremely Effective in 2016 (4 or 5 stars) 50% 42% 28% 24% Average Marketing Maturity Score 41 40 39 36 Saw Improvements in Strategy Driving Communications in 2016 47% 41% 28% 27%
- 50. Ranked Themselves as Very or Extremely Effective in 2016 (4 or 5 stars) 50% 42% 28% 24% Average Marketing Maturity Score 41 40 39 36 Saw Improvements in Strategy Driving Communications in 2016 47% 41% 28% 27% Very Capable and Confident in Skills 44% 48% 44% 33%
- 51. Ranked Themselves as Very or Extremely Effective in 2016 (4 or 5 stars) 50% 42% 28% 24% Average Marketing Maturity Score 41 40 39 36 Saw Improvements in Strategy Driving Communications in 2016 47% 41% 28% 27% Very Capable and Confident in Skills 44% 48% 44% 33% Satisfied or Very Satisfied with the Job 77% 71% 51% 55% Dissatisfied or Very Dissatisfied with the Job 9% 13% 23% 21%
- 52. Biggest Differences Between Effective and Ineffective Integrated Teams • Collaboration within the team was much better. • Clarity about responsibilities and authority was much better. • The working relationship with the executive director was exceptional (rather than merely functional) • They have a specific budget for external communications expenses.
- 53. Biggest Differences Between Effective and Ineffective Centralized Teams • Ability to focus on important over urgent was better. • Staff were much more likely to say they are very capable and confident in their abilities. • Clarity about responsibilities and authority was much better. • The working relationship with the executive director was exceptional (rather than merely functional) • They have a specific budget for external communications expenses.