Priscilla has posted about an interesting report looking at the use of “Web2.0″ tools by non-profits.

The crux is that non-profits are finding it hard to work out what might work to them. My experience is that fundraisers usually want to use these tools to cut to the chase and ask for money. Unfortunately, that rarely works.

So I nodded my head in agreement when I read this comment from Priscilla:

As a campaigner rather than a fundraiser, I’d argue that the blogging and videoing and all the other online communication methods are just as important as fundraising because unless you continue to attract new supporters it’s going to be difficult to increase your funding (more supporters = more donations, and more supporters = more actions taken = more influence = more donations).

Studies are showing that direct fundraising asks in the social media space usually don’t perform well. This is partly a demographic issue - a significant portion of social media participants are young and don’t have the disposable income. But part of it is context.

One of the trickiest things about social media is being authentic - working out how your organisation can realistically engage and participate in their space, rather than trying to get them into your space (be it your website, or your way of thinking).

In effect, the aim is to create a relationship of some sort. Your choice of tools and where you decide to hang out will have a big impact of how much time you have to commit to maintaining that relationship.

The payoff is not an immediate one. Which is why it’s important to choose wisely, and to look for advocacy and network building activities rather than straight money asks. Sure, ask for money. But not straight up - rather, consider where the appropriate opportunities arise as you develop the relationship, and think creatively about how you might package that ask (i.e. using special promotions, tools, events, etc. that are more more interesting than the average form-letter).