Posts tagged ‘open source’

February 19, 2009

Volunteerism: Is a spade a “Spade?”

by Ben Rigby

Thanks to Peggy Hoffman for starting off the conversation about the nomenclature of volunteerism. See post here. I’ve been thinking about this issue for quite some time. The issue is this:

It seems that we’ve narrowly defined what is and what is not “Volunteerism.” And that we may benefit from broading the definition to include other forms of non-market work by citizens.

I actually wrote a bit about this issue in my recent post about Information Age Volunteerism for TechPresident, but cut it, thinking it was a little off focus for the article. Here’s the section before the edit:

Sometimes I wish that Wikipedia would follow me around so
that I could turn to it and ask it questions in the middle of a conversation. No,
it’s not always right. No, it’s not the utopian vision of collaboration that
some wish it were. But it’s damn good. I’d be hard pressed to find a nonprofit
organization that hasn’t benefited from Wikipedia being freely available at any
time of day or night. Wikipedia is volunteerism for the Information Era.

Of course, we can support Wikipedia by giving a donation,
but we can also support it simply by editing a page. Moreover, we can support
endeavors that are like Wikipedia. What’s
like Wikipedia? Open source software. What is the most efficient and value creating
volunteer workforce in existence today? It’s the open source community. Being
an “open source coder” is synonymous for “software development
volunteer.” We can support it by using open source software and by
contributing code to open source projects.

In addition, we can start thinking about how we can use
these Wikipedia/Open Source-like models in the field of volunteerism. The
private sector is quickly coming up with brilliant new ideas that take
advantage of the amateur’s passion for participation. Threadless, Innocentive,
iStockPhoto. These are companies that have dominated their niche by relying on
peer production. These models work. Let’s explore them.

And let’s call Open Source and Wikipedia “volunteerism.” There’s
an issue of nomenclature that flies under the radar. Why isn’t the Open Source
movement the single greatest volunteer accomplishment? I won’t mince words; it is
the single greatest volunteer accomplishment. Why don’t we herald it as such?
Why don’t we model volunteer efforts in other domains after it?

In
my opening analogy, I said that discovering new forms of volunteerism was like
a Magellanic voyage. But of course, Magellan didn’t discover anything. He came
across lands where people had been living for centuries. Open Source has been
here for a long time. However, the field is not linked decisively enough with
volunteerism. Magellan named almost every place he visited and these names still
exist today:
 the
Pacific Ocean,
 Tierra del Fuego, Patagonia. The process of naming a thing for one’s community can have
transformative effects.
  

What do you think?

ps. I also cut the part about Magellan because I thought it was hyperbole and dorky… but here it is, back again… so feel free to say that it’s hyperbolic dorkism.

(and why does Typepad completely jack up formatting?#@#$!)
December 5, 2008

The New Volunteer Workforce: Reading Notes

by Ben Rigby

This blog post is a part of our "Reading Notes" series – where we read
an article, post a summary, and our comments on it.

Article Title: The New Volunteer Workforce
Url: http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/the_new_volunteer_workforce/
Date: 12/02/08

Notes:
A tremendous read about volunteering, packed full with stats and
research tidbits. The article makes the case that volunteering is
severely
undervalued by nonprofits, corporations, and the laity in general. The
result is that nonprofits are leaving billions (that's billions) of
dollars on the table.

Despite Hillary Clinton's claim that 'words don't matter,' the authors
make the case that part of the problem may lay in the term "volunteer"
itself. The term implies "free" which connotes something that is not
valuable (see quote below). You know who's already figured this out?

Coders.

What is the most efficient and value producing volunteer workforce in
existence today? It's the open source movement. And being an "open
source coder" is a synonym for "software development volunteer." So
there's one condor-sized feather in the cap of the authors' hypothesis.

I've blogged about volunteer terminology before (http://blog.mobilevoter.org/2008/07/new-name-for-vo.html)
- it's the reason that we changed the name of our endeavor from
"Volunteer Now" to "The Extraordinaries." I'm convinced that
volunteerism of the 2010s will look nothing like we've ever seen and
that it will go by a different name. And you won't think of it as
"donating your time." You'll think of it as something fun, social, and
good for you. You may even think of it as entertainment for a cause.

This article calls for a more structured and dedicated approach to
volunteer program management. The result of which will be taking some
of that $36billion off the table and into the pockets of nonprofits.
But can we do better? Can we envision that which does not go by the
name "volunteerism." Because, frankly, even if nonprofits do a much
better job at recruiting, retaining, and managing talent, there's still
a lot of value left on the table. And its value that's not even being
measured right now. We're looking at one specific table, but there's a
whole range of Arizonian mesas in the distance.

To see them, we need only look to the example of the open source
software movement. It shifted not only the terminology, but the
business model. For one, it shows us that volunteerism doesn't
necessarily have to be focused around the (nonprofit) corporation.
Social good *and* economic value can be generated by loosely organized
communities of individuals. For two, the product that results from this
group may actually be of higher quality than that produced by any given
corporation. And if you're wondering where that leaves nonprofits,
well, they gain too because software is cheaper, better, and more
widely available than ever before – and in our information economy,
software is how nonprofits do business.

But software production is only one area of expertise. How do we apply
this business-model-busting approach to the rest of that which should
not be called "volunteerism?"

Pithy Quotes:
* "most nonprofits do not view their volunteers as strategic assets"

*
"most nonprofits are losing staggering numbers of volunteers every
year. Of the 61.2 million people who volunteered in 2006, 21.7
million—more than one-third—did not donate any time to a charitable
cause the following year.3 Because these volunteers gave about 1.9
billion hours in 2006, and the value of their donated time was about
$20 per hour4—that calculates to about $38 billion in lost volunteer
time in one year."

* "A few nonprofits have grasped this concept
[that volunteers can generate a tremendous amount of value] and are
taking what we call a talent management approach—investing in the
infrastructure to recruit, develop, place, recognize, and retain
volunteer talent."

* "Five of the main reasons why more than 1 in 3 volunteers don't re-volunteer
1.
Not Matching Volunteers’ Skills with Assignments. Volunteers with
valuable and specialized skills are often dispatched to do manual labor
rather than tasks that use their professional talents."

2. "Failing to Recognize Volunteers’ Contributions"

3. "Not Measuring the Value of Volunteers. "

4. "Failing to Train and Invest in Volunteers and Staff."

5. "Failing to Provide Strong Leadership."

*
"Why isn’t volunteering more respected? Why aren’t more organizations
investing in volunteering? One problem may lie with the term itself.
The word “volunteer” doesn’t say anything about the nature of the
service provided, except implying that it is free. It is often assumed
that something free is not valuable. Maybe we should use different
words—like fundraiser, project manager, or legal counsel—that describe
the work performed and help erode outdated ideas about the value of the
volunteer workforce."

* "If nonprofit leaders want highly skilled volunteers to come and
stay, they need to expand their vision of volunteering by creating an
experience that is meaningful for the volunteer, develops skills,
demonstrates impact, and taps into volunteers’ abilities and interests."

* Their research showed that the primary difference between volunteers
and non volunteers is the amount of TV watched! Back to quote: "People
do not volunteer because nonprofits do not provide them with volunteer
opportunities that interest them enough to pull them away from their
television sets."

* need to rethink the role of volunteer and make it more hybrid with "worker"

CAPITALIZING ON VOLUNTEER TALENT

* Rethinking Work Roles.

* Assigning Appropriate Tasks.
"CNCS research found that volunteers who engage in less challenging
activities tend to be less likely to continue volunteering the
following year. Only 53 percent of volunteers who did “general labor”
activities or supplied transportation continued volunteering the
following year. By contrast, 74 percent of volunteers performing
professional or management activities continued volunteering."

* "Creating Bonding Experiences. "

* "Supporting and Training Volunteers"

* "Using New Technology"

* "Developing Strategic Plans"

* "America’s young people are increasingly interested in making a
difference. One recent study revealed that 68 percent of people between
the ages of 18 and 26 prefer to work for a company that provides
professional volunteer opportunities….The UCLA Higher Education
Research Institute reported in 2005 a 25-year high in first-year
students’ belief that it is “essential or important to help others.”

* "Nonprofits can also use religious organizations to expand their
reach into the African-American, Hispanic, and Asian communities. Each
group does more than one-third of all their volunteering with religious
groups."

* A "surge in professional people interested in putting their skills to
good use creates a tremendous opportunity for nonprofits."

December 3, 2008

The Extraordinaries, open source or not?

by Ben Rigby

I was about to pose this question to my partners in the Extraordinaries, but thought what better use than a blog to invite commentary, thoughts, ideas from the community of readers (small though they may be at this early stage).

In the comments to this post, I'd love to discuss the merits and pitfalls of making this particular project open source.

It seems fitting that this project, which is predicated on the power of crowdsourcing would use the open source model to develop its software. But of course, I've got traditional concerns about business model and also about management overhead required to make an open source project successful. With such limited resources (3 people working part time and a handful of volunteers), will we be spending all of our time trying to ensure that the open source community is humming instead of focusing on our (nonprofit) business objectives?

And then what about business model? Given freely available software, how do we make a living and create a sustainable organization. I've read a lot about how other orgs (IBM for instance) are doing it, but how would we do it with The Extraordinaries in particular.

Love to hear thoughts back on this one.

-ben

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,379 other followers