Friday, December 30, 2005

End of Year (2005) Blog Review

This is less a review of all my favorite blogs of 2005 than it is a compilation of recently reviewed blogs that are great... I thought I'd put them all in one place.

  • It was very pleasing to read Daniel Ben-Horin's Of NetSquared, the Well, the Moment...and the Wikipedia Bustup | NetSquared. I appreciated the long-view perspective. (Not many people know I was one of CompuMentor's first "employees" back in 1987... I learned about CM on the WELL... it all started with a WELL message board called "nonprofit".) As always, Daniel does a great job at providing a big picture and helping us connect the dots and learn from history. Thanks, Dan.


  • Nancy Schwartz has been around nonprofit online communications for many years. In addition to her excellent e-newsletter about nonprofit communications, and she's now entered the blogosphere with Getting Attention. Nancy is also doing a fine job of seeing the intersection of nonprofit communications with other fields, and her most recent post is about the power of social information in fundraising communications.


  • Nancy White recently blogged about Potluck as Metaphor (and reality) of Civic Engagement. I liked seeing this as further evidence of the power of social networking and civic engagement. A reminder that it's not all about technology...


  • In fact, it may be about the behavior of dog-scratching, according to Alan Rosenblatt of the Media Center in Why Integrate Online and Offline Advocacy Strategies.


  • But tools are always changing, and people want to know about them... Rob Enderle also of the Media Center does a nice compilation of what's coming down the pike in 2006 with Media Tech Trends in 2006.


  • In the realm of "pure" nonprofit management, I came across a couple of resources recently worth diving into:





Thursday, December 01, 2005

Bringing Some "Edge" to Fundraising

[This blog post was inspired by my participation in the Nonprofit Blog Exchange.]

I'd like to highlight a couple of sites that bring a little "edge" to an old and tired but undying topic-- nonprofit fundraising.

Usually, I don't touch this topic; others are far better at it than I. But what I like about these two below is that they really resonate with my desire here "At the Intersection" to apply lessons from a variety of fields/industries to the particular topic at hand.

  1. Jeff Brooks in his Donor Power Blog serves as a great "translator", applying lessons learned in one sector to another. For example: see how he translates a Chronicle of Philanthropy article about baby boomers and volunteerism into lessons about baby boomers and giving.


    And his "edge" is particularly evident in his insistence that nonprofits shift their attention from the almighty DOLLAR long enough to think about the DONOR. See in particular:


  2. Amy Kincaid's Fundraising Breakthroughs has a different kind of edge and focuses more on helping organizations think through how to plan for and manage effective fundraising. She reminds us to periodically lift our noses from the work in front of us and see the larger context inside of which we work. We may just be surprised, for example, that Congress has passed a law that screws our chances to raise money for the causes we hold dear (e.g., repealing the Estate Tax).


    Amy's also great at pointing out dangerous pitfalls especially new nonprofits can make in their efforts to raise funds.


Definitely add these two to your blog rolls, even if fundraising isn't your gig. In addition to bringing some new voices to an old topic, they've both got good eyes and ears for learning lessons that cross borders...

Monday, November 28, 2005

McKinsey & Co. on IT Investments

McKinsey & Co. is a global management consulting firm that also conducts research that they publish through McKinsey Quarterly. Over the last few years, McKinsey Quarterly has published a number of reports about effective (and ineffective) management of Information Technology (IT). A list of the MQ articles, most of which can be read in full for free, follow. While I recommend taking the time to read the longer articles (each about four pages long), McKinsey’s recommendations seem to boil down to three main points:


In order for choices about and investments in IT initiatives to be successful...


  1. They must be driven by organizational objectives
  2. Leadership must take responsibility for their success
  3. They should be combined with investments in building management capacity

#1: IT initiatives and their managers must be driven by organizational objectives.

Too often, IT is placed in a "silo" as a support function. As a result, most technology options are then examined as a solution to some problem, not as an investment in accomplishing the mission of the organization. Ideally, priorities and decisions about technology are made from a shared understanding of the general priorities of the organization.

"IT projects must be subjected to business-case assessments before launch," MQ writes, identifying:


  • Which organizational objectives & desired outcomes will be advanced by the IT initiative?
  • What are the upfront and ongoing costs?
  • What other resources and capacity are required to sustain the initiative?
  • What benefits can be expected from the IT initiative?
Managers of IT (and by extension, those of us who support them) must demonstrate an understanding of the organization’s mission, vision, goals and objectives. Such an IT leader is a senior-level peer with earned clout who:

  • understands the business of organization the same way other senior leaders do, but can also be perceived as "one of us" by IT staff;
  • uses the same language that other senior leaders do;
  • thinks about IT initiatives as business (not technology) solutions;
  • assesses IT initiatives with business metrics (i.e., organizational objectives to achieve mission).

But success also requires that program directors understand the role technology plays to support programs and take responsibility for that role:

#2: The responsibility for the success of IT in the organization lies with organizational and program directors.

In a 2003 study (4), MQ found that while 90% of directors expect their program directors to:


  • identify IT investments needed to implement programmatic strategies,
  • support, monitor and assess the implementation of IT projects,
  • help make IT investment and budget decisions, and
  • make the procedural and organizational changes that technology implementations require,
only 10% of program leaders actually do this.

Many organizational directors delegate IT policymaking to a committee system. But without authority, such systems are "like a vehicle without an engine," leading to IT investments that generate only marginal returns. In addition, if the make-up of the committee is too junior, the group risks missing key issues such as:



  • What is the role of IT in this organization?
  • How do we measure its impact on the organizational objectives?
  • What strategies are competitors pursuing?
  • What constitutes best or promising practices?

MQ insists that senior level execs must take responsibility for IT, going as far as to say that no IT project should be funded unless a senior executive is willing to take responsibility for the results up front, "to ensure their successful completion. These leaders must own decisions instead of just making them and assuming that someone else will be accountable." In an environment of such accountability, IT investments are more likely to be concentrated on a smaller number of high-impact areas, jettisoning the many "cool" but non-essential technology "baubles."

But what would this look like? To enable program directors to think about the role technology can play to achieve their desired programmatic outcomes, they must:


  • Have greater involvement in the planning and development of IT Projects.
  • Provide greater oversight and management of IT Projects
  • Draw IT managers more closely into programmatic work where they can be made more accountable for the performance of programs and where IT and Program develop joint goals.

In such an environment, IT is no longer a "support" function; it "spans business unites and functions and connects organizations to partners and customers... and fosters improvements and competitive advantage." Therefore, its role is fundamental to an organization's success. Without such involvement, IT will have "only a limited sense of what the [program] wants, inevitably suppl[ying] it with a product that is less functional than it expects or even needs."


#3: Investments in Building Technology Capacity Should be Paired with Investments in Building Management Capacity.

Several articles about managing technology are not free from the McKinsey Quarterly web site. One of them, shared with me by a colleague, summarized research conducted by McKinsey & Company on the benefits of investments made in technology capacity.

In the manufacturing sector, at least, investments in technology capacity produced far fewer increases in productivity than investments in management capacity, but investments in both significantly increased both productivity and financial returns on investment.





The researchers recommended that before a company makes a significant investment in technology, it should invest first in building the capacity of its management.

MQ found that companies that adopt these practices "are improving their return on investment and managing their IT costs more successfully."



Links to original McKinsey Quarterly articles:


(Note McKinsey Quarterly requires a free registration to access its free articles. You will also find there links to their “premium” articles which requires a paid subscription.)



Readers might also be interested in..
Building stronger IT vendor relationships, by Baljit S. Dail and Andrew S. West, Web exclusive, June 2005