Promising Practices
"Coming of Age in the Information
Age"
We live in an information age that is set to transform the
prospects of communities. Inboxes, both real and virtual,
overflow with research from think tanks, foundations,
national organizations and university research centers
about "what works" to build strong communities. Packaged in
various shapes and sizes - reports, newsletters, issue briefs,
how-to guides - such information creates knowledge and builds
the capacity of nonprofit practitioners to develop and
strengthen their organizations and programs. On any given day,
the following may cross a nonprofit practitioner's desk: a
report on evaluation findings that suggests a new program
design or intervention; a Web site featuring current
information on a specific field to keep practitioners abreast
of new developments, trends and possible grant opportunities;
and issue briefs that synthesize recent research in a
particular area. The link between knowledge and practice is
clear.
Perhaps less obvious is the potential of fusing information
and knowledge gathering with an organization's strategic
communications work. In fact, both are essential precursors to
any communications effort. Deliberately integrating knowledge
with fundraising, marketing, community awareness campaigns and
membership recruitment efforts will yield significant
dividends for an organization's communications efforts.
However, simply increasing quantity and accessibility of
information is no guarantee that those seeking knowledge can
find it and find it useful. Accessing, absorbing and applying
information require considerable investments of time -
something that is often in short supply in the nonprofit
practitioner community.
To understand the process of knowledge creation, the Pew
Partnership for Civic Change launched a series of focus groups
with nonprofit practitioners from San Antonio, Texas, St.
Louis, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland to sharpen our
understanding of how this group accesses the information they
need to enhance their programs. Specifically, we wanted to
know:
- Current learning approaches and activities of the
nonprofit sector
- How nonprofits create, manage and apply knowledge
- Preferred ways nonprofits receive information
- What nonprofits want to become better
learners
Findings
Several key findings
from the focus groups provide a snapshot of the challenges
facing the nonprofit practitioner trying to manage the latest
information while also providing quality services and keeping
the lights on
- Nonprofit practitioners are struggling, often in
isolation, against a dizzying glut of information. They are
surrounded by masses of useful information but day-to-day
activities preclude them from tapping into it. Stacks of
unread reports, articles, and listserv messages stimulate a
nagging sense of inadequacy about their work. Frustration
builds when practitioners know that the information that
they need is out there but do not know how to get to it
quickly.
- Most nonprofits have not integrated a systematic
learning process into their organizations' culture to deal
with information. Instead, they rely on "periodic learning"
- a hybrid of continuous and just-in-time learning. Periodic
learning rarely targets long-term issues or challenges
facing the organization.
- For most nonprofits, direct one-on-one contact with
someone they trust - usually other nonprofit practitioners
and parent organizations - is the preferred method of
accessing needed information. Low on the list were
conferences and workshop training, except for networking
"hallway conversations."
- Learning is often equated exclusively with
organizational development and basic program evaluation
issues. Nonprofits focus their scarce learning time on
issues such as strategic planning, board development and
fundraising and struggle in their efforts to develop better
data collection processes and measurement tools. Rarely did
practitioners find time to invest in learning how to develop
new programs and strategies so that their organization could
continue to fulfill its mission.
For those who create and disseminate information for the
nonprofit sector, these findings may suggest a dismal picture
- practitioners overwhelmed by day-to-day work and often
unable to ferret out and apply the information they need to
deliver services. However, the focus group participants were
eager to both acknowledge the inefficiencies in their learning
processes and suggest solutions. Two potential solutions - a
knowledge broker and a learning collaborative - were developed
by focus group participants.
Knowledge Broker
High on the wish list for
practitioners is a trustworthy local source who can open doors
to the best-known and most current information - a knowledge
broker. The knowledge broker's role would be similar to that
of an agricultural extension agent. As the client, the
practitioner would set the learning agenda, identify how the
agenda fits into the organization's short- and long-term
goals, articulate the organization's strengths and weaknesses
vis-ý-vis learning and identify viable strategies for
disseminating information within the organization once
received. The broker's role would be to sort through,
synthesize and translate information tailored to the interests
and needs of the organization. Success would rely on the
ability of the practitioner and broker to develop a process
that supports continual - rather than piecemeal and erratic -
learning. By reacting specifically to the interests identified
by the organization, the knowledge broker ensures that the
information is relevant to the organization.
Who would these knowledge brokers be and where would they
come from? For starters, they would be experts in a particular
issue such as youth development or media communications, adept
at accessing and delivering a range of research on a
particular topic in a timely manner. On the soft-skills side,
they would also be trained to develop long-term relationships
with nonprofit practitioners. Frequent visits and regular
phone contact would ensure that the brokers develop
sensitivity to organizations' operating environment, taking
into account their time constraints, budget issues and
community contexts. An organization interested in amplifying
their message to constituents might, for example, consider a
knowledge broker with media relations skills. Depending on the
organization's needs, the broker might suggest specific
vehicles for a message, develop a framework for researching
key audiences and identify possible tools for tracking the
impact of selected communication strategies. The value of the
broker rests on his or her ability to synthesize and translate
information for the practitioner in a way that efficiently
captures and transfers knowledge.
In all likelihood, every community already has formal or
informal knowledge brokers. Possible sources for knowledge
brokers might include local universities or colleges, retired
nonprofit practitioners, independent consultants or
foundations. Practitioners could also be encouraged to
consider the "unusual suspects"- those not traditionally
tapped by their community. Our focus group participants
indicated that the private sector and local government
agencies are often underutilized resources.
Learning Collaborative
The second suggestion
raised by the focus group participants was a learning
collaborative or learning team. The collaborative would
consist of individuals from within the same organization or a
cross-section of individuals from different organizations. In
contrast to the knowledge broker, the responsibility for
learning would be shared by each member. This strategy is
hardly revolutionary. In the medical profession, for example,
residents often convene regularly to discuss recent research
findings. Members take responsibility for synthesizing and
presenting one professional journal article to the group,
obviating the need for each individual to read every article
that crosses his or her desk. For instance, a collaborative
may develop a learning agenda that focuses on effective media
campaigns. One member might be responsible for identifying
several examples of successful public awareness campaigns
while another may focus on how to identify the most
appropriate vehicle for the message and yet another may be
charged with summarizing methodologies for evaluating a media
campaign.
There are several components that point to the viability of
a successful learning collaborative. First, there is a
built-in incentive for members to participate. Second,
meetings are regularly scheduled and are considered "part of
doing business." Third, the collaborative is doing more than
updating colleagues on recent activities - it aims at specific
and longer-term learning.
The potential for introducing knowledge brokers and
learning collaboratives would address several of the
challenges raised by nonprofit practitioners by introducing a
regular, methodical learning process and focus to the
nonprofit organization. Through synthesis and sharing,
practitioners would be able to maximize their learning time
and both meet their desire for personal contact and receive
tailored support from a trusted source. Collaborations and
knowledge brokers would help break the isolation that
nonprofit practitioners often operate in, particularly when it
comes to learning, and both hold promise for decreasing the
frustration that comes from not being able to access needed
information. A final added benefit is a likely increase in
practitioners' sense of efficacy and control.
Introducing these concepts would be neither quick nor
simple. Both money and time would be required, as would a
change in practitioners' mindset. We know that organizations,
when faced with the choice, opt for doing rather than
analyzing. However, with support from their stakeholders -
board members, funders, and other practitioners in their
communities - nonprofit organizations are poised to do more
than just harness the information age. They are willing and
enthusiastic learners ready to come of age.
This article is based on a report, Coming of Age in the
Information Age. It is available to download from the Pew
Partnership for Civic Change web site,
www.pew-partnership.org. Copies may be requested from mail@pew-partnership.org
or (804) 971-2073.
Jacqueline Dugery, director of program research
The
Pew Partnership for Civic Change
5 Boar's Head Lane, suite
100
Charlottesville, VA 22903
e-mail: dugery@pew-partnership.org |
