Miistakis Strat Comm Plan (Client Copy)

November
2014
Fall
17
08
Miistakis Research Institute

Strategic Communications Plan
By:
Wilma Charon
Stephanie
Edwards PLAN
STRATEGIC
COMMUNICATIONS
Tara Grayer
M o u n t R o yPaulina
a l U n iKoutaitseva
v e r s i t y. C O M M
4841. Allison MacKenzie
Executive Summary
Through the COMM 4841 Strategic Communication Plan
course at Mount Royal University (MRU), Team Royals is
provided with an opportunity to partner with Miistakis Research
Institute. The purpose of this plan is to put in action everything learned in the past three
years of public relations and provide the organization with a detailed strategic communication
plan, which can be successfully utilized.
Miistakis Research Institute was created to play the different roles necessary to broker,
transfer or mobilize knowledge about land, water and wildlife, in order to preserve it. Miistakis
provides its stakeholders with the knowledge and necessary information about a piece of land
the client has requested information on. Miistakis team consists of seven brilliant minds,
which are able to transfer key findings and knowledge regarding land, water and wildlife into
comprehensive language.
Meetings with MIistakis as well as the organizational assessment revealed that the
greatest challenge Miistakis is currently facing is low awareness amongst its potential
stakeholders. Due to this, Miistakis is receiving relatively low donations and very little media
coverage.
An extensive preliminary research was conducted in order to make a comprehensive
analysis of the organization and highlight important areas of focus for Miistakis. The
communication audit, competitive assessment, along with further research and analysis of
STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN
the best current practices used in the non-profit sector, revealed innumerable opportunities
Miistakis could draw upon to enhance its reputation.
To better understand the current and potential stakeholder platform, empirical and
secondary research was conducted to discover the characteristics of Miistakis primary,
secondary and tertiary stakeholders. Based on the primary and secondary stakeholder
groups, key messages and strategies are suggested and a benefits statement of whats in it
for them was created for each group.
Miistakis primary goal is to raise awareness and build positive reputation. Using the
preliminary research as a groundwork three objectives were created to support this goal
based on awareness, acceptance and action.
Various strategies were used to support the goals and objectives set to achieve
Miistakis goal. These strategies included proactive action and communication; specifically,
launching a social media campaign, audience engagement, participation and feedback,
generating newsworthy information, revamping Miistakis social media platform and website,
and engaging in transparent and two-way communication. Under each of the strategies
several tactics are identified to help the organization achieve its desired goal.
The success of the plan will be measured by systematic evaluation (followers on
Facebook and Twitter, numbers of attendees to events, etc.) as well as by a summary
evaluation to gauge the success of the implementation of the entire plan, from which lessons
for further improvement will be drawn.
3
It is anticipated that this plan will launch January 2015

and till continue on through to December 2015.
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................... 6
SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS............................................................................................................... 7
ORGANIZATIONAL ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................... 7
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................... 8
Top Competitors.............................................................................................................................................. 8
Internal Assessment........................................................................................................................................ 9
Advantages..................................................................................................................................................... 9
STAKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT........................................................................................................9
PRIMARY.............................................................................................................................................................. 12
SECONDARY.......................................................................................................................................................... 12
TERTIARY.............................................................................................................................................................. 12
Benefit statements........................................................................................................................................ 14
COMMUNICATION AUDIT............................................................................................................ 14
EXISTING COMMUNICATION COLLATERAL..................................................................................................................... 14
COMMUNICATION OPPORTUNITIES.............................................................................................................................. 15
TRENDS AND BEST PRACTICES...................................................................................................17
Online presence............................................................................................................................................. 17
Websites........................................................................................................................................................ 18
Traditional media channels............................................................................................................................ 19
5
e-Philanthropy............................................................................................................................................... 19
Marketing Communications........................................................................................................................... 20
RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................. 20
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES............................................................................................................. 21
Strategies...................................................................................................................................................... 22
Heuristics....................................................................................................................................................... 23
KEY MESSAGES......................................................................................................................... 23
TACTICS.................................................................................................................................... 25
TACTICS CHART......................................................................................................................... 28
BUDGET.................................................................................................................................... 31
EVALUATION.............................................................................................................................. 32
REFERENCES............................................................................................................................. 35
TABLE OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: TEAM PROFILES................................................................................................53

APPENDIX B: SWOT..............................................................................................................56
APPENDIX C: GANTT CHART..................................................................................................57
APPENDIX D: ISSUE ANALYSIS...............................................................................................58
APPENDIX E: STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS...................................................................................66
APPENDIX F: COMMUNICATION AUDIT....................................................................................74
APPENDIX G: BEST PRACTICES..............................................................................................80
7
Introduction
Team Royals is a team of four fourth year public relations
undergraduates, which consists of: Stephanie Edwards, Paulina
Koutaitseva, Wilma Charon and Tara Grayer. Through the
COMM 4841 Strategic Communication Plan course at Mount
Royal University (MRU), the team is provided with an
opportunity to partner with a not-for-profit organization to gain communications planning
experience. The purpose of this plan is to help Miistakis achieve its organizational goal of
maintaining a valuable reputation and building awareness.
Miistakis Research Institute is a small not-for-profit organization located on the MRU
campus. The organizations main goal is to preserve the landscapes by providing its clients
with maps, coordinates and suggestions on how to better utilize the land to promote
environmental conservation. Although Miistakis operates in Alberta, British Colombia and
Montana, this report will focus on the province of Alberta.
Being a research institute, a conservation charity, and a social enterprise allows
Miistakis to play the different roles necessary to broker, transfer or mobilize knowledge
(Miistakis Institute, n.d., About us, para. 3).
This plan has been created to provide a critical overview of the Miistakis Research
Institute while focusing on the key communication and strategic planning opportunities the
organization can take advantage of to achieve its goals. This report incorporates the findings
of research conducted including the examination of the sectors proven best practices,
analysis of the existing communication vehicles, exploration of current and potential
stakeholders and ways in which most significant Miistakis issues can be turned into
opportunities. The team has dedicated over 150 hours to researching, writing and developing
this plan to produce an effective piece that is applicable and tailored to the Miistakis Institute
and provides long term benefits to the organization.
Situational Analysis
Organizational Assessment
Established in 1995, Miistakis has consistently provided research tools and resources which
include citizen science for conservation, market-based tools, ecosystem services, conservation GIS,
sustainable landscapes and communities, transportation ecology, private land conservation, and
wildlife management. The organization rules itself by its charitable mandate. As stated by some of
its members, if a project does not fit its mandate, they do not do it. Miitakis is a proud conservation
charity that strives to provide neutral information to its stakeholders:
We envision a world where communities have genuine access to the science and research
they need to make choices that promote healthy landscapes. We study the landscape in order to
help people conserve it. We also work to make innovative research accessible to communities and
decision-makers. (Miistakis Institute, n.d., Homepage.)
Miistakis is comprised of seven employees that specialize in eight areas of expertise
and operate in Alberta, BC and Montana. These staff members work individually and
collaboratively as many of the services they provide often overlap. Miistakis operates on a
project by-project budget, which means that its hours are included in the specific projects
they are working on. Miistakis operated with an annual budget of $1,057,819 in 2013 and on
a budget of $858,450 in 2012. (Annual report, Miistakis, 2014).
Currently, there is no designated communications team since the organizations
communication efforts are not a priority that can be included in the budget they provide to its
clients for a predetermined project. As a result, the entire staff works collectively on
producing communication materials and maintaining its digital platforms. Miistakis
9
communication materials consist of postcards, posters,

newsletters and brochures. The organization uses several
communication channels such as webinars, seminars and
social media platforms. Miistakis financial limitations, which
account for the lack of a communications team, present a
challenge for the organization as it limits its ability to identify
trends, implement communication strategies, raise awareness
and ultimately enhance organizational reputation. This could lead to a decline in the interest
from current and potential stakeholders, as Miistakis is unable to differentiate itself
competition.
Miistakis has a niche in translating scientific information to terms its clients can easily
understand; however, the organization is currently unable to communicate who they are, and
what they do to a general audience. In order to enhance the organizations communications
from the inside out, each staff member should be able to articulate the role of Miistakis as an
environmental conservation charity, and individual roles within the organization. It is essential
that Miistakis employees are able to clearly explain what they do and why, as they are the
best advocates of the organization.
Environmental Assessment
Environmental non-profits in Alberta comprise two per cent of all the non-profits in the
province, or approximately 500 environmental non-profits in Alberta. Within that number only
a small fraction are research institutes (the majority are advocacy groups), and none of them
offer all of the services Miistakis does.
Environmental non-profits in Alberta receive one per cent of total giving which means
Miistakis competes with all these environmental non-profits for limited amounts of funding
and donations.
10
Only two per cent of Alberta charities operate in more than one province, which gives
Miistakis an advantage over other charities because it can receive funding and donations
from all three provinces where it operates (Alberta, British Columbia and Montana).
Top Competitors
Miistakis has a very low level of competition within the environmental non-profit sector
because it works closely with other organizations in the Canada. In fact, many NGOs seek Miistakis
assistance for their own projects, which makes the organizations below partners and competitors.
Nature Conservancy of Canada: Toronto, ON.
Southern Alberta Land Trust Society: High River, AB.
Alberta Conservation Association: Sherwood Park, AB.
Internal Assessment
Advantages
Miistakis has specialized knowledge on eight different areas, which gives it an

advantage over its competition.
Unique positioning: Miistakis has the advantage of being currently located on the
campus of Mount Royal University, a post secondary institution located in Calgary,
Alberta. Its location provides an opportunity to tap into programs such as graphic
design, marketing, public relations, journalism and broadcasting
Niche market: The translation of scientific research to plain terms for audience.
Opportunities
11
To implement a strategic plan that gives Miistakis the

long-term direction it needs to increase its donation
base.
To strengthen Miistakis branding through social media,

digital platforms and print collateral to give the
organization the recognition it lacks.
To commit to consistent communications to inform and engage its key publics.
Stakeholder Assessment
The following list of stakeholders was devised based on meetings with the client, along
with the aforementioned organizational and environmental assessments.
1. Transportation and agricultural government agencies - such as Alberta Transportation,
Integrated Land Management, Agricultural and Rural Development - work closely with
Miistakis, request its services, and determine the actions to be taken based on its
research.
2. Funding bodies - such as the Alberta Lottery Fund and Alberta Land Trust Grant Program
- provide Miistakis with the additional funds it needs to operate (Alberta Government,
2014) and (Alberta Lottery Fund, 2013-14).
3. Other non-governmental organizations (NGO) - such as the Canadian Parks and
Wilderness Society, Wildlife Conservation Society of Canada, and the Alberta
12
Conservation Association - work with Miistakis and draw upon its knowledge to
complete projects (Easwaramoorthy, 2006).
4. Mount Royal University and University of Calgary communities. Miistakis current and
former location on these universities respectively, gives the organization access to
university students as intercessory publics and as possible volunteers.
5. Academics - people doing applied research - draw upon Miistakis knowledge for their
scholarly research.
6. Rural Municipalities also work closely with Miistakis, request its services, and determine
the actions to be taken based on its research.
7. First Nations communities and reserves as potential customers. This group has a high
influence since they are located in rural areas and have authority over many land pieces
where industrial development might be imminent.
8. Corporate landowners - such as oil and gas companies, railroads, construction
companies - seek Miistakis services to maintain environmentally friendly operations.
9. Private landowners - farmers and ranchers associations such as the Alberta Landowner
Council and the Grassroots Alberta Landowners Association, and individual wealthy
landowners hold most of the land Miistakis works on.
10. Community Foundations - such as the Banff Community Foundation, and the
Community Foundation of North-western Alberta - have influence in the decision-making
13
Government Agencies
Funding Bodies
Other NGOs
University communities
Academics
Rural Municipalities
First Nations
Corporate landowners
Private landowners
that concerns its land and provide funding for projects.

(Community Foundations of Canada, n.d)
J2
I1
A3
A3
F2
E2
D1
C1
B1
J2
B3
B1
B2
B1
B3
D3
B2
J2
C2
C1
C3
C3
C1
C2
J3
I2
D3
D3
F3
E3
J3
E1
E1
E3
E3
X Private
D First
Nations
Landowners
Corporate
Rural
X
E landowners
Municipalities
J1
I2
H3
G3
J1
J1
J3
Stakeholder analysis tools

Priorities Worksheet (Smith, 2013,
pg. 70)
Community
foundations
Private
BPriority Publics
landowners
Corporate
C Community
landowners
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Priority
ranking
13
13
foundations
First Nations
X Rural
F Academics
Municipalities
University
Academics
G1 H3
X
X
X
X
X
X
G
University
STRATEGIC
COMMUNICATIONS
PLAN
communities
H1
Prioritized
score
6
Other NGOs
HFunding
Other Bodies
NGOs
Government
I Agencies
Funding Bodies
7
13
5
1
7
12
18
3
4
5
1
14
15
Miistakis key publics were determined based on the organizations own assessment of its
stakeholders as well as by Smiths worksheet (et al) and on Mitchells Power, Legitimacy and
Urgency model (1997, pg. 854).
Primary
Non-environmental government agencies: Alberta Transportation and Agricultural and
Rural Development.
These agencies have a highly legitimate and urgent relationship with Miistakis since
they request its services to review legislation, create maps and develop plans for natural
resource conservation. Also, this audience has more power to influence the organization than
any other stakeholder.
Secondary
Private landowners: farmer and rancher associations and individual wealthy landowners.
16
Canadian donors care more about Canadas environment than ever before.
Philanthropic support from private citizens for environmental charities has grown to an
estimated $286 million (Easwaramoorthy, Barr, Gumulka, & Hartford, 2006, p.2). This group
has high legitimacy and power since its donations have no conditions attached. Its level of
urgency is medium since it depends on its need for Miistakis services.
Tertiary
Corporate donors: oil and gas firms. In 2003, Albertas Mining and Oil and Gas was the
industry with the third largest donations to environmental organizations with 4.4 per cent of
all the corporate donations (Easwaramoorthy et al). This stakeholder has high urgency for
Miistakis research tools and a legitimate relationship with the organization. They have a
medium level of power determined by its project funding.
Audience Segmentation
Demographic, Behavioural and Psychographic profiles
Primary stakeholders - Government agencys decision makers
The Federal Sustainable Development Act suggests that Canada is moving towards
sustainable development and environmentally friendly policies to maximize the efficient use
of natural resources (Environment Canada, 2013). This makes this stakeholder group very
influential and important for Miistakis.
In terms of demographic profiling, the government decision makers in Alberta
Transportation, Integrated Land Management, Agricultural and Rural Development combined
account for approximately 89 people (Stats Can, 2011). These decision makers have a high
17
income and medium ethnic influence. This group is comprised

of dual income families who are environmentally conscious and
care about their health and nutrition (Environics, 2013).
Preferred communication channels: Mixture of traditional and
digital media such as journals and online publications, as well
as websites, newsletters, PSAs and official project proposals.
Secondary Stakeholders - Wealthy landowners
With a significant percentage of European, Asian and Middle Eastern immigrants, this
group is the second wealthiest cluster in Canada (Environics, 2013). Wealthy landowners are
often middle age, married couples with university level education. They include
philanthropists who belong to environmental, political and cultural groups and often donate to
charity (Environics, 2013). They have university-aged children and own vacation cottages and
lake houses (Environics, 2013). Preferred communication channels: Mixture of traditional and
digital media. This group subscribes to online environmental magazines, podcasts and
newsletters. Email marketing is favoured.
Secondary Stakeholders - Farmer and rancher associations
Farmers and ranchers are reached in groups through landowner associations rather than
individually. Alberta has around five landowner associations that account for approximately
250 people (Stats Can, 2011). The rate of individuals of more than 55 years of age that
prevails in this group continues to increase (Stats Can, 2011). This group also has significantly
more men than women and a low ethnic presence. They are likely to live on small to medium
sized farms with families of three members in the household (et al). Operators of larger farms
(with $2 million or more in yearly revenues) are within the ages of 50 and 54 years old (et al).
18
Preferred communication channel: Traditional media such as radio and TV news stations and
newspapers. Direct mail and telemarketing are favoured.
Benefit statements
Primary stakeholders
Miistakis makes accessible the science and research tools that agencies need to make
informed decisions that promote and preserve healthy landscapes.
Secondary stakeholders
Miistakis works closely with communities to translate research and science results into a
language the audience can understand to make informed decisions that promote healthy
ecosystems.
Tertiary Stakeholders
Miistakis provides corporate landowners with the tools they need to operate in a safe
and environmentally conscious manner to ensure the minimal impact of operations on land,
water and wildlife.
19
Communication audit
Existing Communication Collateral
Communication platforms currently used by Miistakis
include Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, a blog, brochures,
seminars, webinars, symposiums, posters, word-of-mouth and
emails. An analysis of the communication vehicles and
collateral suggests that Miistakis is not properly maintaining its communication outputs.
According to Miistakis, there are approximately 1,000 subscribers to its e-newsletter to date;
however, Facebook and Twitter do not have numbers that match its newsletter subscribers. Its
Facebook account, established in 2010, has 116 likes whereas its Twitter account,
established in 2011, has 393 followers and 181 active followings. The Facebook page includes
a blog which is neither visible on its main website, nor used in distributed communication
material. Additionally, Miistakis distributes brochures, posters and postcards to provide
information about its organizational vision and mission; however, not all communication
collateral provides a visible identification of the social media platforms, nor do they
communicate the Miistakis Institutes brand. The brochures, which consist of an open concept,
include five inserts with Facebook and Twitter logos located on the backside of the package.
The posters are age appropriate and the content appropriately segmented but it lacks the
Miistakis Institutes brand and identity. Its postcards change every year and are scarce in
supply. Lastly, it was discovered, through client meetings, that communication collateral is
given to clients after securing a project as opposed to using it to generate projects.
An analysis was also conducted to determine the reading level of written content of the
About Us tab on its websites main page as well as on a staff-written piece in the enewsletter, summer edition 2014. The results revealed that its website content in the About
Us page is rated at a grade 12 reading level, with an approximate age of readability as 17-18
20
years of age (Readability formulas, 2014). The e-newsletter content from its 2014 summer
edition was rated at a grade 15 reading level, with an age of readability as a college graduate.
Hence, its written content is overly complicated and difficult to read, taking into account the
demographic and psychographic characteristics of its key publics.
Communication opportunities
Building positive reputation
The Miistakis team strongly believes they have a positive word-of-mouth reputation
passed on from client to client; however, they acknowledge that most of its clients are not
aware of all the services it offer and are not completely aware of what Miistakis is and what it
does. If Miistakis wants to differentiate itself from other charities that offer similar services, it
needs to build a stronger reputation in the non-profit and environmental industries and with
its target audiences.
But, how does a small non-profit organization build reputation and compete for mindspace? In order to be successful, a more centralized, active, focused and scientific approach
should be developed for its communications. Daw and Cone (2011) portray this brand as a
three-dimensional value scheme, as it:
1. Convinces the head a unique and differentiated idea that explains what an
organization does better than others (p. 20). This can be done by articulating the
expertise and knowledge Miistakis team holds and unique research it conducts, which
is like no other in Alberta and surrounding provinces.
21
2. Touches the heart breakthrough nonprofit brands put a

larger cause and the outcomes they seek ahead of its
own organizational needs, in order to become a magnet
for those who are passionate about its mission (p. 21).
Miistakis must not just tell what project it has just
completed, but rather explain what positive impact this
project had on the environment.
3. Engages the hands nonprofits can create a sense of community inside and outside
the organization by uniting groups of strangers in an experience of kinship of shared
experiences and commitments (p. 21). This is done by Miistakis attending local events
and various environmental meetings to promote its identity and build reputation.
Being more involved in the community, participating in events and giving speeches at
various meetings, delivering and announcing its projects in a useful and educating way and
promoting its staff in a brighter light, will provide Miistakis with reputational success. This will
lead to a rise of awareness amongst potential stakeholders and will attract clients and donors.
Adopting stakeholder-appropriate communication channels
As highlighted in the Communication Audit, Miistakis has a Twitter account, Facebook
account, YouTube account, a website and a newsletter subscription option. However, its online
presence is not actively used to have effective results for the organization. The Twitter
account has minimal tweets and none of them link back to Miistakis website or promote its
brand and/or projects. Its Facebook page promotes nothing about Miistakis, but rather
22
shares environmental information and has no visible link back to website. Similarly, the
YouTube account has only three videos, which have limited views. None of the social media
accounts link back to the Miistakis website as the main source of information it is.
The key to effectively apply Miistakis communication efforts would be to promote the
two-way communication system, and engage with the public on a consistent basis. Miistakis
strength is that it already has the social media presence, it just needs to make better use of it
to craft stakeholder oriented messages.
On the other hand, Miistakis must also evaluate the importance of each social media profile it
has and decide whether its existence is needed.
Trends and Best Practices

After scanning the non-profit scene, many successful strategies, tactics and communication
tools became apparent. There are many popular trends to raise awareness and reputation in
this sector and Miistakis has a great opportunity to adopt those that better fit its needs. Many
leading non-profit organizations are embracing social media as one of the main sources of
communication. This is being done by developing and maintaining an interactive website and
building a strong presence on suitable social media channels such as YouTube, Twitter,
Facebook, Instagram, and Blogs.
Online presence
Building a strong Internet presence and reputation is the most important strategy for
raising awareness and fund development in the non-profit sector. Some of the leading
charities have also ventured into online video and social networking and have had major
23
success, which Miistakis can do by fully engaging in the social

media platforms that best suit its key publics.
A relevant success story is the World Wildlife Fund
(WWF), which has adopted some of these strategies by
developing a presence on YouTube, Twitter, Blogs, Facebook
and LinkedIn to promote campaigns, fundraise and educate the
publics on current events (Top Social Media Campaigns, para.10). The Humane Society of the
United States created a YouTube contest asking viewers to create videos responding to the
Michael Vick dogfighting controversy, which resulted in an extremely successful interactive
campaign raising record-breaking donations (Top Social Media Campaigns, para.10). The
Humane Society of the United States, as well as many Canadian Humane Societies maintain a
strong presence on Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook. The Wildlife Conservation
Society of Canada also has a strong presence on the web (Top Social Media Campaigns,
para.10). It posts videos and pictures of adorable animals to draw attention to its work
protecting wildlife as well as provides YouTube videos, blogs, publications and keeps up-todate information on its latest news on the website (Top Social Media Campaigns, para.10).
Although some organizations are pulling back on the traditional communication methods
to focus on its presence on social media, they still see the benefits of traditional methods
when dealing with specific stakeholders within specific demographics (Top Social Media
Campaigns, para.10). The ability to identify when and where to use specific marketing
communications is an important factor in the success of establishing and maintaining
relationships (Top Social Media Campaigns, para.10).
Websites
A non- profit organizations website should come with ease when navigating the cause,
where to donate money, and how to become more involved. The website should be the hub
24
of all information that is easily accessible to potential customers and donors. Contact
information should be clear and apparent for any media inquiries and/or potential coverage. It
needs to do this in a way that is inviting to the targeted donors and/or stakeholders (Top
Social Media Campaigns, para.10).
The success of the WWF organization and Wildlife Conservation Canada rides on the
current effective and interactive websites that have been created (Top Social Media
Campaigns, para.10). Each website offers information about various programs and initiatives
they support, current projects underway and where you can find them. Each home page
includes links to all its supporting social media and any link to external content (Top Social
Media Campaigns, para.10). Miistakis can successfully adopt this trend to make its website
the hub of information where the audience can find links to donate and volunteer, reviews
and statements from partners and clients as well as all the links to its social media platforms,
newsletter and blog.
Traditional media channels

Traditional communication vehicles such as brochures, newsletters, and annual reports
are very effective with target audiences of 45 years and older, which makes it an essential
platform for Miistakis to reach its key publics. Even though there are many new innovative
ways, as highlighted in this paper, to reach current publics and stakeholders, traditional
media remains an effective and credible channel that is particularly important to Miistakis
given the age demographic of its largest stakeholder group (private landowners). Miistakis
has the opportunity to adopt these strategies to gain new partnerships, raise awareness, and
to enhance its reputation and donations.
25
e-Philanthropy
There is a growing importance for non-profit
organizations to develop an online presence defined as ePhilanthropy (Hart, Greenfield, & Johnston, 2005). This practice
examines how every charitable organization can analyze its
options and select the appropriate strategy to integrate
traditional marketing, communications, and fundraising practices through its online presence
(Hart, Greenfield, & Johnston, 2005, p. 15).
e-Philanthropy is an ongoing process of communicating, educating, cultivating and
soliciting non-profit supporters to build and enhance stronger relationships (Hart, Greenfield, &
Johnston, 2005, p. 15). As previously stated in this plan, the implementation of this strategy
resulted in many non-profits effectively engaging its key publics by focusing on:
1. The relationship: integrate all messages to supporters.
2. Give supporters a reason to visit you online.
3. Interact with supporters; dont just send messages.
4. Communicate using multiple methods.
5. Access and improve performance.
26
Marketing Communications
When reading John Burnetts Non-profit Marketing Best Practices (2007), he highlights two
key styles in marketing communications. First, the intention of the communication is to
present a persuasive message with a goal to create uniqueness in the mind of the targeted
audience (p. 213). Secondly, marketing communications can be divided into external and
internal communications, which are directed at different audiences (p.214). In today's fast
paced and quick to change economic climate, every non-profit organization needs a
foundational marketing strategy that increases awareness and support (Burnett, 2007, pg.
215). Non-profit Marketing Best Practices examines successful marketing tools and techniques
that have helped non-profit stand out among the growing number of similar organizations.
Recommendations
It is recommended that Miistakis enhances its social and digital media communications
and exploits its current relationships with partners and academic resources to create a
dialogic communication platform using the tools and resources already available. By
maintaining its social media presence, modifying content readability and monitoring the
audience participation Miistakis can enhance its reputation as a leader in the environmental
conservation resource industry with a niche in translating findings based on scientific
research.
A dialogue versus a monologue communication model has proven to engage audiences
by providing a two-way communication system that allows interaction between both the
sender and receiver. Proper implementation and consistent use of social media platforms will
27
provide Miistakis with an opportunity to create a two-way of

communication with its current and potential stakeholders,
donors and publics.
Miistakis not only needs to focus on the communication
channels but also on the message itself. This organization has
a great opportunity to get to know its key audiences so that it
can tailor its key messages to them and make that connection that is currently missing. This
will allow Miistakis to efficiently exploit its unique advantage and provide its stakeholders with
a value proposition to satisfy its needs and wants.
Miistakis has a great opportunity to embrace successful communication practices to
highlight what stands it apart from competitors. This will allow the organization to examine
what path it should take to communicate its unique advantage and develop a presence on
social media. Miistakis has received reputable awards and participates in relevant events in
this sector, which could be highlighted and marketed through al the suitable communication
channels mentioned above. Being the only research institute that offers such a wide variety of
specialized services makes Miistakis a hub for all the research and science needed to promote
the conservation of wildlife and landscapes. Recognizing and adopting these practices,
Miistakis will benefit as a charitable non-profit organization by attracting the donors,
individuals and communities that the organization can serve.
Goals and Objectives

The following goals and objectives focus on Miistakis primary and secondary audiences.
1. Reputational Goal Primary audience

28
To enhance the organizations reputation within the environmental non-profit sector.
Objectives
1.1.
To have an effect on the awareness of government agencies, specifically to increase
their awareness by 25 per cent within four months.
1.2.
To have an effect on the perception of decision-makers on government agencies,
specifically to gain their interest in the services offered by Miistakis by increasing requests
for information by 15 per cent within eight months.
1.3.
To have an effect on the action of government agencies decision-makers, specifically
to increase their request for Miistakis services by 10 per cent within a year.
2. Reputational Goal Secondary Audience

To enhance the organizations reputation with farmer and rancher landowner associations and
individual landowners.
Objectives
29
2.1.
To have an effect on the awareness of private
landowners, specifically to increase their awareness by 25
per cent within four months.
2.2.
To have an effect on the acceptance of private
landowners, specifically to increase their requests for
information by 15 per cent within eight months.
2.3.
To have an effect on the action of private landowners, specifically to increase their
request for Miistakis services by 5 per cent within a year.
Positioning statement
Miistakis is recognized for being a provider of the most comprehensive research tools and
resources required for environmental conservation.
Strategies
Awareness
Generating newsworthy information (Ongoing and systematic use and monitoring of

communication materials and social media)
Acceptance
Audience interest
30
Audience feedback
Action
Audience participation
Heuristics
Recognition
Capitalizing on Miistakis specialized services and its reputation within the
environmental non-profit sector to promote the organization and raise awareness. As well,
using the organizations connection and interrelation with similar organizations and
recognizing the similar services its customers use to connect those dots. Implement network
marketing to enhance the organizations reputation.
Authority + Social Proof
Highlighting the reputation and credibility of its existing clients to prove they are an
organization with high standards, chosen by top industry leaders and industry regulators.
Key Messages
31
Message strategy
The rhetorical approaches highlight ethos, logos and
pathos as the ethical, the logical and the emotional approach
that an organization or an individual can use to frame its
message to the audience. In the case of Miistakis we have
chosen two approaches to communicate with the primary and
secondary audiences.
Primary stakeholders: Government agencies

A logos approach to the message is more appropriate for this audience because it gives
Miistakis the opportunity to capitalize and take advantage of the factual evidence and
scientific research they provide and use to deliver a strong, logical message to the audience.
The use of an ethical approach or an emotional approach would not be as effective for this
audience as they are looking for the facts when evaluating the best candidate to perform
scientific research and evaluate existing legislation.
Secondary stakeholder: Private landowners

A pathos approach is more effective for this audience because although this key public
is also concerned with the facts, they are more effectively reached through messages that
appeal to emotion. Miistakis can create powerful messages by using visuals to display the
32
connection between communities and wildlife, and the emotional effect the absence of
wildlife can have on communities.
Key messages
Primary audience: Government agencies.
1. Miistakis strives to provide neutral and unbiased science to reconcile environmental
priorities with economic development.
2. Miistakis works to identify market-based approaches that support conservation, then
works to create the policy and tools that will bring them to fruition.
Proof Points
Miistakis is currently working with the Government of Alberta to provide decision
support tools to aid in the assessment of applications to the provincial Land Grants
Program.
The M.D. of Bighorn requested the Miistakis Institute, with support from the Land Use
Secretariat, do a review of the Transfer of Subdivision Density (TSD) program with
respect to the new legislation and to make recommendations for program improvement.
Secondary audience: Private landowners
1. Miistakis supports the private land conservation community, including landowners, by
providing necessary research services, tools and resources, as well as land
management and policy assistance.
2. Miistakis is interested in examining the ways to improve the coexistence of humans and
wildlife. This often includes determining wildlife needs, assessing human impact on
33
wildlife habitat, and exploring adaptive management for

both humans and wildlife.
Proof Points
In 2011, the Environmental Law Centre and the Miistakis
Institute, at the request of the Government of Albertas
Land Use Secretariat, undertook an applied research
project seeking to better understand the limitations of
the current policy in order to inform a more robust policy on conservation easements for
agriculture.
In the fall of 2011, Miistakis partnered with the Government of Alberta and the Alberta Prairie
Conservation Forum (PCF) to produce some communication materials for the provincial
Grasslands Vegetation Inventory.
MiistakisandCowsandFisharecollaboratingtoreintroducebeavertothePineCreekwatershed.A
monitoringprogramgearedtowardshowingchangeovertimeinbothwaterquantityandqualitywillbe
designedtodocumentthechangesthatfollowbeaverreintroduction
Tactics
INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION TACTICS - Awareness objectives
Generating newsworthy information Primary stakeholders
1. Twitter
1.1. Two posts a day, including responses, mentions etc.
34
1.2. Discuss projects, notify followers about upcoming events and exciting projects
Miistakis is working on; support with more project-related visuals; link back to website.
1.3. Twitter promotion on newsletter and newsletter promotion on Twitter.
1.4. Post information and videos
2. Facebook
2.1. Monitor and maintain: one post per day minimum not including responses to
comments or inquires on the page.
2.2. Post more project-related videos.
2.3. Post blog entries, back up with visuals and link back to website.
3. Website
3.1. Redesign to cater to various audiences, make it more user-friendly and easy to
navigate.
3.2. Re-adjust website content to a grade eighth level of reading
3.3. Make it more visually appealing, better use of the videos and visuals they already
have.
3.4. Make it the information hub with every other platform linked back to it.
35
3.5. Provide social proof partners and customer pull

quotes.
4. Newsletter Secondary Stakeholders
4.1. Redesign to make it visually appealing and reader
friendly: content displayed in chunks, more white space,
and better layout.
4.2. Adjust the content to a recommended grade eight to eleven literacy level.
ORGANIZATIONAL MEDIA - Awareness objectives

Generating newsworthy information Secondary Stakeholders
1. Print collateral
1.1. Create a trifold brochure to summarize Miistakis services
1.2. Improve Miistakis current post cards to make them audience-centric and cater to
audiences level of knowledge. Make them event-specific to cater to a Trade Show
Miistakis will be attending to hand out at the show.
2. Controlled media
36
2.1. Direct mail: Seasonal, three times a year. Send to secondary stakeholders consisting
of brochures, invitations to shows, postcards and newsletters (as per request).
2.2. Op-eds: Send out op-eds to various environmental magazines and other special
interest publications to increase coverage and raise awareness.
3. Communication channels
3.1. Direct mail
3.2. Special interest magazines
ORGANIZATIONAL MEDIA - Acceptance objectives

Audience interest Both primary and secondary stakeholders
1. Feature stories
Create eight feature stories two per season. Audience likes feature articles, as they
are interactive, interesting and personable. Interest in these will drive attention to
Miistakis. These will appear in local papers, magazines, university publications
Audience feedback Primary stakeholders

1.
Social media monitoring

37
Interactive use of social media platforms, daily

monitoring to ensure two-way communication
2. Environmental / Conservation surveys
Post environmental surveys on social media platforms

and website to engage the audience and gauge how
much they know about conservation and Miistakis services.
INTERPERSONAL COMM- Action

Audience participation Both primary and secondary stakeholders
1.
Attend conference with current partners
2.
Invite Miistakis audience to Under the Western Skies and Citizen Science
conferences and the success of the campaign by the amount of people attending.
Developing a volunteer bank
Reach out to business, communication and science programs faculty to post volunteer
opportunities.
Engage in campus-based volunteer fairs.
38
Tactics Chart
Objective: Awareness objectives

Strategy: Generating newsworthy information
Tactics
Social
Audience
Primary
Timing
Jan. 5 to Feb.
media
stakeholde
28
platforms
rs
Approx. cost
20 hours
Desired Outcome
Increased
Evaluation
Clicks, likes, shares,
awareness of the
traffic to the
organization
website, followers,
through
etc.
revamped social
media presence.
Print
Secondary
Feb. 1 to March
collateral
Stakeholde
Brochures
rs
40 hours
How many people

Increased
picked up the
awareness about
brochures and
39
Postcards
the
organizations
Controlled
Secondary
media
Three times a
40 hours
year
mandate and its
postcards.
Website traffic,
services
event attendance,
throughout
information
campaign
requests.
Objective: Acceptance objectives

Strategy: Audience engagement (audience interest and feedback).
Tactic
Audience
Timing
Approx.
Desired outcome
Evaluation
cost
40
Feature
Both
2 per season
20 hours
Have a positive
How much
impact on the
information was
perception of the
requested online,
audience about
email or phone
Miistakis
about specific focus
30 minutes
To create
of the story
Analyzing the
daily
interactive 2-way
nature and number
communication
of comments,
story
Social
Primary
Ongoing, daily
media
monitoring
mentions, retweets,
Surveys
Primary
Ongoing, once
a week
20 hours
To collect
etc.
Collecting the
feedback.
number of
responses and
analyzing the
nature of them.
41
Objective: Action
Strategy: Audience participation
Tactics
Attend
Audience
Both
Timing
Approx.
Desired outcome
Evaluation
Monitor partner
cost
$5,000
To make a positive
Number of
partners
events and seek
impact on the
attendees, post-
conferenc
participation in
behaviour of
event surveys,
events as
attendees, to
media monitoring,
appropriate
change their
collection of
perception about
feedback through
Miistakis and
all possible
encourage
channels.
support.
To make a positive
Measure number of
Develop a
Both
Monitor campus
$3,000
volunteer
activity to
impact on the
applications,
bank
participate in
behaviour of
tabulate information
42
volunteer fairs
attendees, to
requests, material
and reach out to
change their
pick-up.
faculty to post
perception about
volunteer
Miistakis and
opportunities.
encourage
support.
Budget
Miistakis Media Campaign Budget
Internal Contribution
Social Media
Social Media Platform
Social Media
Monitoring
Print Collateral
Brochure
Estimated
20 hours
30 mins. /day
20 hours
Postcards
20 hours
Controlled Media
Direct mail
Op eds
Feature Story 2 per
20 hours
20 hours
20 hours
Breakdown
Actual
4 weeks - 5 hrs. /week
Content 15 hrs. Design 5

hrs.
hrs.
Over a one year period
Over a one year period
43
season
Survey/Administration
Survey Analysis
Total @ 12.00/hr.
Communication
Collateral
Brochures
Photocopying/Printing
Posters
Develop a volunteer
bank
Total
hrs.
5 hours
5 hours
160 hours
Estimated
$250.00
$325.00
10 hours
Ongoing
$575
Evaluation
By comparing the objectives, tactics and strategies with the desired outcomes, we are
able to determine which measurement tool will be specifically used to gauge each of the
awareness, acceptance and action objective.
44
Objective 1
To have an effect on the awareness of environmental government agencies, specifically
to increase their awareness by 25 per cent within four months.
Outputs
The success of the physical products ((brochure, postcards and print ads, etc.) is
measured through customer awareness surveys and environment monitoring to gage publics
attitudes. As well, we will tabulate the number of print materials that are picked up by the
audience from the locations where we distribute them.
Objective 2
To have an effect on the perception of decision-makers on environmental government
agencies, specifically to gain their interest in the services offered by Miistakis by increasing
requests for information through its digital platforms by 15 per cent within eight months.
Outtakes
45
The evaluation methods used in this plan will measure

the effectiveness of the organizations key messages, the
effectiveness of our chosen communication platforms and the
resulting decoding and acceptance of these messages,
demonstrated by a change in attitudes and opinion in our key
audiences. This will be measured by tabulating the number of likes, shares, retweets, etc., on
the social media platforms as well as tabulating the responses to the invitations and
subsequent attendance to the conference and fundraising event. As well, the monitoring of
requests for information through websites, social media, emails and phone calls.
Objective 3
To have an effect on the action of decision-makers on environmental government
agencies, specifically to increase their requests for Miistakis services by 10 per cent within a
year.
Outcomes
46
In order to measure the outcomes, we will compare the changes in attitude and
behaviour of the primary and secondary audiences as demonstrated by the number of
requests for Miistakis services, as well as the number of donations and funding received.
Conclusion
An extensive preliminary research was conducted in order to make a comprehensive
analysis of the organization and highlight important areas of focus for Miistakis. The
communication audit, competitive assessment, along with further research and analysis of the
best current practices used in the non-profit sector, revealed innumerable opportunities
Miistakis could draw upon to enhance its reputation.
Based the findings from research conducted, it is apparent that Miistakis is presented
with the opportunity to utilize the strategies and tactics to support the goals and objectives
outlined within this report.
Firstly, it is recommended that Miistakis enhance its social media and digital
communication to exploit its current relationship with partners.
Secondly, by utilizing academic resources, Miistakis is in a position to create a dialogic
communication platform and maintain social media presence. Thirdly, adhering to a standard
level or grade 10-12 readability of key messages will increase engagement between Miistakis
47
and its identified stakeholders. Finally, by clearly identifying

social media platforms on all distributed communication
collateral will support the commitment and consistency by
Miistakis to connect with current and potential stakeholders
and donors.
By implementing these recommendations, Miistakis will be able to successfully and
efficiently exploit its reputation of being a leader in the environmental conservation resource
industry with a niche in translating findings based on scientific research.
References
About Us.(n.d). Retrieved October 3, 2014, from Miistakis Institute website:
,,,,,,,,,,,http://www.rockies.ca/
48
Burnetts, J. (2007). Nonprofit Marketing Best Practices. Retrieved from

http://books.google.ca/books?
id=_76peh67eb0C&dq=best+communication+practices+for+not+for+profits&source=
gbs_navlinks_s
Charity Intelligence Canada. (2013). Environmental Charities in Canada. Retrieved from
http://www.charityintelligence.ca/environmental-charities
Daw, J., & Cone. C. (2011). Breakthrough Nonprofit Branding: Seven Principles to Power
Extraordinary Results. Retrieved from http://books.google.ca
Environics Analytics. (2013). PrizmC2 Marketers Handbook. Retrieved from EA Clusters
http://lgdata.s3-website-us-east1.amazonaws.com/docs/1352/1220632/PRIZM_C2_Snapshots_2013.pdf
Environment Canada. (2013). Planning for a Sustainable Future: A Federal Sustainable
Development Strategy for Canada. Retrieved from https://www.ec.gc.ca/ddsd/default.asp?lang=En&n=06E31414-1
Feldman, P.M., Bahamonde, R.A., & Bellido. I.V. (2013). A new approach for measuring
corporate reputation. So Paulo, 54, 53-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034759020140102
49
Gorney, C. (2011). Social media for nonprofits: analysis and

discussion of Facebook for Habitat for Humanity San Luis
Obispo. Retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/joursp/18/
Hart,T., Greenfeild, J.M., Johnston, M. (2005). Nonprofit Internet
Strategies: Best Practices for,Marketing, Communications, and Fundraising Success.
John Wiley & Sons.
Ivings, J. (n.d.). Oakville canopy club. CPRS award-winning social marketing campaign. CPRS
Catalog No. 5-13-IVI/13. Retrieved from http://www.mtroyal.ca/library/
inc/cprs/pdfs/5-13-IVI-13%20Ivings,%20Janine.pdf
Miistakis Institute. (n.d.). About us. Retrieved October 9, 2014, from
http://www.rockies.ca/about.php
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification
and salience: Defining the principle of whom and what really counts. Academy of
management review, 22(4), 853-886.
50
Niven, P.R. (2011) Balanced Scorecard Step-by-Step for government and Nonprofit Agencies.
(2nd ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Nonprofit Hub (2014). The Top 4 Nonprofit Social Media Campaigns of 2013 (And What
You,Can Learn). Retrieved October 12, 2014, http://www.nonprofithub.org/social-media
Smith, R. (2013). Strategic planning for public relations. (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Statistics Canada. (2011). Demographic changes in Canadian agriculture. Retrieved from
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/96-325-x/2014001/article/11905-eng.htm
51
APPENDICES
52
Wilma Charon
Wilma is Bachelor of Communication student in her fourth year of Public
Relations. Wilma spent her summer as a Public Relations Intern at one of the
biggest and most reputable publishing companies in the energy industry in
Canada. With them, she gained invaluable experience in the project
management side of Public Relations, while strengthening her writing and
research skills and gaining industry knowledge. Wilma is always willing and
eager to learn and improve. She expects to graduate in 2015, and she plans to
pursue a Masters Degree in Strategic Communications.
Stephanie Edwards
Stephanie Edwards is currently in her fourth year in the Communications
Public Relations program at Mount Royal. Stephanie has experience in
working in communications for multiple non-profit organizations and is
currently working in communications, public relations for the City of Calgary.
Stephanie has gained valuable experience in assisting a non-profit
organization with achieving its goals by building a strategic communication
plan with her team.
Appendix A: Team Profiles
53
Tara Grayer
Tara is currently a fourth year student at Mount Royal University. She is
pursuing a Bachelor of Communication degree with a focus on Public Relations
and expects to graduate in spring, 2016. Tara recently retired after working 10
years in the customer service and hospitality industry. She acknowledges that
her work experience has allowed her to refine her leadership, interpersonal and
community engagement skills.
Outside of Public Relations, Tara enjoys reading mystery novels, attending
festivals, watching documentaries and travelling throughout North America.
Paulina Koutaitseva
Paulina is currently in her fourth year of studies towards a Bachelor of
Communication, majoring in public relations, at Mount Royal University.
Through this program, specifically the Strategic Communications Planning
course, Paulina gained valuable experience in assisting a non-profit
organization with achieving its goals by building a strategic communication
plan with her team. Paulinas role within the team was the editor, designer and
researcher. Her previous experience at Graham Construction allowed her to
further develop her research and interpersonal skills, which were important to
the team.
54
55
Appendix B: SWOT
Strengths
Weaknesses
Specialized knowledge
Strategically positioned
Niche market
Lack of marketing strategies
Collaborative work
Lack of strategic organizational
Comprehensive services
Accessibility to resources
Lack of
communications team
goals
Limited reach
Lack of awareness
Opportunities
Threats
Develop marketing strategy
Target multiple audiences
Exploit academic reputation
Increase of competitive forces
Establish new partnerships
Inability to meet increased demand
Constant change in municipality

held positions
of services
Lack of strategic planning lost

legacy.
56
Appendix C: Gantt Chart
57
Period Highlight:
1
MiistakisResearchInstitute
Plan
Actual
%Complete
Actual (beyond plan)
%Complete (beyond plan)
Media Campaign
PLAN
PLAN
ACTUAL
ACTIVITY
START
DURATION
START
DURATION
ACTUAL PERCENT
COMPLETE
Social Media Campaign

Social Media Monitoring
Surveys/Campaign
Develop Social MediaPlatforms
Modify Communication Collateral
Edit/Print Communication Collateral
Advertising
Controlled Media
Controlled Media
Launch phase 1 of 4
Develop Key Messages
Launch phase 2 of 4
Launch phase 3 of 4
Trade Show
Reserve Space
Pay in full space
Develop Packages
Print Package Material
Prepare Post Show Survey
Conduct Survey
Analyze/Evaluate Survey
Feature Story 1 of 2
Feature Story 2 of 2
Events 2016-Post Campaign
Host/Co-host A Conference
Develop Timeline for Conference
Fundraiser Event
Develop Timeline for Fundraiser
1
1
1
1
6
7
6
1
1
5
14
18
27
41
50
0
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
5
26
52
52
52
8
1
3
13
52
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
0
4
5
2
2
2
2
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
4
1
4
2
20
4
20
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0%
0%
0%
0%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56
Appendix D: Issue Analysis

58
Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to identify two issues Miistakis Research Institute is facing and
suggest an approach to resolve the issues. Three peer reviewed articles by Feldman, Bahamonde
and Bellido, Daw and Cone, and Gorney are analyzed and findings will be delivered to assist
Miistakis in overcoming its issues. A successful CPRS case is reviewed and used as an effective
example of dealing with an issue.
Being a research institute, a conservation charity, and a social enterprise allows Miistakis to play
the different roles necessary to broker, transfer or mobilize knowledge (Miistakis Institute, n.d.,
About us, para. 3).
Two biggest issues Miistakis is currently facing are:
1.
Lack of reputation when competing for mind-space
2.
Building and maintaining a suite of stakeholder-appropriate communication channels
Analyzing these two issues and providing suggestions on how to overcome these problems will
assist Miistakis in its achievement of success. Results will be delivered through a strategic
communications plan built by our team.
Brief
According to Smith (2013), an issue is a situation that presents matters of concern to
organizations (p. 25). As per Smith, in order to achieve a better understanding of the issues, an
analysis of the situation, organization and audience needs to be conducted.
Miistakis Institute studies landscape to assist landowners, corporations, government and any
other entity in its resource-management decision-making process. With a team of seven, Miistakis
is a small community working for a great cause conserving land and using it wisely.
59
Building positive reputation

The Miistakis team strongly believes they have a positive
word-of-mouth reputation passed on from client to client, which
Miistakis strongly relies on. This is extremely important as,
according to Feldman, Bahamonde, and Bellido (2013),
reputation could be seen as depicting the firms ability to render valued results to stakeholders
(p. 55). A positive reputation helps decrease uncertainty of potential stakeholders. Therefore,
reputation is seen as an asset of great value to organizations especially when attempting to
differentiate from the rest of the industry and create potential barriers for potential competitors
(Feldman et al, 2014, p. 55).
But, how does a small non-profit organization build reputation and compete for mind-space?
In order to be successful, a more centralized, active, focused and scientific approach must be
taken to communicate better with stakeholders. Feldman et al (2013) suggest that a greater
knowledge of stakeholder perceptions about the organization will assist in defining a reputational
platform.
As Daw and Cone (2011) suggest, a reputation can also be seen a breakthrough nonprofit
brand (BNB), [which] articulates what an organization stands for: the compelling, focused idea that
sets it apart and is meaningful to its supporters (p. 20). Daw and Cone (2011) portray this brand
as a three-dimensional value scheme, as it:
1.
Convinces the head a unique and differentiated idea that explains what an organization
does better than others (p. 20). This can be done by articulating the expertise and knowledge
Miistakis team holds and unique research it conducts, like no other in Alberta and
surrounding provinces.
2.
Touches the heart breakthrough nonprofit brands put a larger cause and the outcomes
they seek ahead of its own organizational needs, in order to become a magnet for those who
60
are passionate about its mission (p. 21). Miistakis must not just tell what project it has just
completed, but rather explain what positive impact this project had on the environment.
3. Engages the hands nonprofits can create a sense of community inside and outside the
organization by uniting groups of strangers in an experience of kinship of shared experiences
and commitments (p. 21). This is done by Miistakis attending local events and various
environmental meetings to promote its identity and build reputation.
Being more involved in the community, participating in events and giving speeches at
various meetings, delivering and announcing its projects in a useful and educating way and
promoting its staff in a brighter light, will provide Miistakis with reputational success. This will lead
to a rise of awareness amongst potential stakeholders and will attract clients and donors.
Adopting stakeholder-appropriate communication channels
Currently Miistakis has a Twitter account, Facebook account, YouTube account, a website and
a newsletter subscription option. This online presence is not as actively used, as it should be. The
Twitter account has minimal tweets and none of them link back to Miistakis website or promote its
brand and/or projects. Its Facebook page promotes nothing about Miistakis, but rather shares
environmental information and has no visible link back to website. The YouTube account has only
three videos, which all have limited views. None of the social media accounts have any links back
to Miistakis website.
But how does a small non-profit organization, with limited communication resources, build
stakeholder appropriate messages and utilize appropriate communication channels?
Gorney (2011) suggests in her paper that organizations dont need a specific strategy for each
individual social media site; they need a relationship strategy that encompasses all aspects of
social media (p. 2). Gorney (2011) states, Social media is called social media for a reason. It
harnesses the power of human relationships to drive action and change, especially in regards to
nonprofits (p. 3).
61
When looking at Facebook, Gorney (2011) notes

businesses and organizations that are successful on Facebook
will see a rise in profits and sales, increased awareness among
publics, and open communication with publics (p. 3). From
Gorneys (2011) observations, these successes are achieved by
organizations, which have a plan that includes calendars and
what to post when (p. 3). The key to Miistakis success would
be promoting the two-way communication system, engaging with the public and doing so on a
consistent basis. Gorney (2011) concludes: the key to being successful on Facebook is to create
compelling content that will start a conversation. This will encourage two-way conversation
between people and organizations, which can enlarge an organizations efforts quickly, easily and
inexpensively (p. 4).
Abandoned or very low-active profiles create only minimal exposure for the organization,
and could turn off potential supporters if they witness inactivity on the site (Gorney, 2011, p. 6).
Gorney (2011) makes a suggestion on how to manage social media presence. She suggests using
the Aaker and Smiths Dragonfly Model: Focus and G.E.T.
First, nonprofits need to Focus and identify a single, concrete measurable goal. Then, they
need to Grab Attention with something personal, unexpected, visceral, and visual.
Second, they must Engage. Creating a personal connection will allow them to tap into
emotions and values. This would include showing empathy, authenticity or telling a story.
Lastly, the model says to Take Action and enable and empower others to do this. The call to
action must be easy and simple for an audience to follow (p. 7).
The above suggestions are not only anchored to Facebook, but can be and should be applied
to any social media profile. Miistakis strength is that it already has the social media presence; it
just needs to make better use of it.
62
By following the suggestions made by Gorney (2011), Miistakis online presence will soon be used
to its own benefit. Miistakis must evaluate the importance of each social media profile it has and
decide whether its existence is needed.
CPRS case study application
The main goals of Ivings (n.d.) social marketing campaign conducted for the Oakville
Canopy Club were to leverage the towns reputation, educate key audiences, build on existing
relationship with key stakeholders and raise public awareness.
To reach these goals, Iving (n.d.) did the following to achieve success with the campaign:
1. Research/situation analysis was conducted to gauge public awareness (p. 1) to understand
what is the general understanding of the invasive foreign insect from Asia that threatens to
kill the towns almost 180,000 ash trees (p. 1). This was done through quantitative research
such as surveys. This approach is beneficial to Miistakis to help grasp an understanding of
what the current overall perception and knowledge of the organization is.
2. Establish goals and objectives, which are to leverage the towns reputation, educate key
audiences, build on existing relationship with key stakeholders and raise public awareness.
Miistakis goals are very similar, which are to build its reputation, educate key audiences
about who Miistakis is and what it does, and build on existing relationship with key
stakeholders to raise public awareness.
3. Communicate to the target audiences, specifically the primary audiences, which are the
media and property owners. Reach out to them via traditional and online communication
vehicles such as: website, Twitter and Facebook, social media campaigns, and a media
relations campaign, which includes news releases, photo opportunities, media pitches and
coordination of interviews with key spokespeople (Iving, n.d., p. 1). Also through local
63
papers, town-wide events, public open houses for

discussion, direct mail postcards and various Canopy
Club branding things such as: T-shrits, books, temporary
tattoos, etc.
Reaching out to its stakeholders is Miistakis key goal in
order to achieve awareness increase. This should be done
through various attendances at events and environmental community meetings, as well as key
messaging through Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, publishings in local papers and various media
pitches.
For Miistakis this case study is of importance, as the goal of the Canopy Club was to raise
awareness, gain reputation and communicate to the Oakville residents to implement and educate
key stakeholders about a risk the dangerous insect is causing to the surrounding environment. The
Canopy Club reached out via various communication channels to its public and, therefore,
successfully raised awareness and gained trust of the local residents.
Conclusion
In summation and post analysis of various literatures by Feldman, Bahamonde and Bellido,
Daw and Cone, Gorney and Ivings CPRS case study, Miistakis biggest challenges are building a
positive reputation, which will allow it to fight for the best spot in its potential stakeholders mind
space and successful utilization of appropriate existing communication channels in achievement of
that.
Feldman, Bahamonde, and Bellido (2013) state that reputation is what builds trust and
speaks for the organization, therefore is of great value to any business. Yet, in order for Miistakis to
identify its reputational platform, it needs to grasp an understanding of peoples current perception
of the organization.
64
In order for Miistakis to make the best use of its existing reputation and build on that to reach
out to a greater audience, it must follow the three-dimensional value scheme presented by Daw
and Cone (2011), which is:
1. Convincing the head introducing a unique and differentiated idea that explains what an
organization does better than others
2. Touching the heart putting forward what an organization is most proud of to become a
magnet for those who are passionate about its mission
3. Engages the hands nonprofits can create a sense of community by uniting groups of
strangers in an experience of kinship of shared experiences and commitments
For Miistakis to learn how to make better use of its existing online communication platforms, it
should follow the Aaker and Smiths Dragonfly Model: Focus and G.E.T. found in the Gorney
(2011) article, which stands for:
Focus identify a single, concrete measurable goal
Grab Attention introduce something personal, unexpected, visceral, and visual
Engage create a personal connection allowing the audience to tap into emotions and
values. In other words, tell a story
Take Action enable and empower others to do this. The call to action must be easy and
simple for an audience to follow
The CPRS case study of the social marketing campaign completed by Iving (n.d.) explains
step by step how the Canopy Club built an awareness campaign, which had a successful ending.
This study is good reference for Miistakis to look at as an example of how to increase awareness
and knowledge of what the Miistakis Institute is and what it does for Alberta land and environment.
65
Appendix E: Stakeholder Analysis

Introduction
The Miistakis Institute is a Canadian environmental
charity and research institute that offers a wide array of
research services and tools for environment conservation (land, water and wildlife) and sustainable
economic development projects in Alberta, British Colombia and Montana.
As part of a strategic communications plan, this research paper strives to identify and
categorize Miistakis key publics into primary, secondary and tertiary audiences the organization
should target in its communication efforts. This stakeholder analysis aims to provide Miistakis with
a guide to effectively target and reach these audiences in order to increase their awareness of the
organization and ultimately achieve organizational goals. For the purposes of this paper we will
focus on stakeholders located in Alberta, since this is where Miistakis is located and where its
primary operations originate.
To begin our analysis we utilized secondary research on government agencies, funding
bodies, and non-profit information databases (Charity Intelligence Canada, 2013), as well as
empirical research through our meetings with the client, to devise a list of influential stakeholders
for the organization. Using a variety of tools from Smiths Strategic Planning for Public Relations,
we categorized our publics into meaningful groups according to their linkage to the organization.
Once we had defined our primary, secondary and tertiary audiences, we proceeded to segment our
audiences further to include demographic, behavioural and psychographic trends, as well as
preferred communication channels for each group. Lastly, using stakeholder theories from scholarly
articles, we make recommendations on how the organization should manage its key publics.
66
Identifying stakeholders
After talking with the client and performing an environmental scan of the organization we
formulated a list of stakeholders. This stakeholder list was put together taking into account Smiths
five definitions of publics: Accessible, large enough, distinguishable, important and homogeneous
(2013, pg. 60-61).
1. Wildlife and Agricultural government agencies such as Parks Canada, Integrated Land
Management, Environment Sustainable Research Development (ESRD) and the Alberta
Ecotrust Foundation.
2. Funding bodies such as the Alberta Lottery Fund and Alberta Land Trust Grant Program
(Alberta Government, 2014) and (Alberta Lottery Fund, 2013-14).
3. Other non-governmental organizations (NGO) such as the Canadian Parks and Wilderness
Society, Wildlife Conservation Society of Canada, and the Alberta Conservation Association
(Easwaramoorthy, 2006).
4. Mount Royal University and University of Calgary communities.
5. Academics people doing applied research.
6. Rural Municipalities.
7. First Nations communities and reserves.
8. Corporate landowners such as oil and gas companies, railroads, construction companies.
9. Private landowners farmers, ranchers, wealthy landowners.
10. Community Foundations such as the Banff Community Foundation, and the Community
Foundation of North-western Alberta (Community Foundations of Canada, n.d).
67
J
J2
J2
J2
J3
J3
J1
J1
J1
J3
Private landowners
First Nations
Academics
University communities
Other NGOs
Funding Bodies
Government Agencies
Stakeholder analysis tools Smiths Priority Ranking tool
Priority
Publics
Prioritiz
ed score
A Community
6
foundations
I
H
G
F
E
D
C
B
B Private
11
I1 A3 A3
F2 E2 D1 C1 B1 ALandowners
Community foundations
C Corporate
10
I3 B1 B2 B1 B3 D3 B2 X B Private landowners
landowners
I2 C1 C1 C1 E3 C3 X
XD CFirst
Corporate
Nationslandowners
7
E Rural
16
I2 D3 D3
F3 E3 X
X
X D First Nations
Municipalities
E2 E2
E3
E3 X
X
X
XF EAcademics
5
G University
0
I2 H3 G3
X
X
X
X
X F Academics
communities
NGOscommunities
6
I2 H3
X
X
X
X
X
XH GOther
University
I Funding
15
I3
X
X
X
X
X
X X
H Other NGOs
Bodies
STRATEGIC
X
X
XCOMMUNICATIONS
X
X
X
XPLAN
XJ IGovernment
Funding Bodies 18
Agencies
Priorit
y
rankin
g
2
3
5
1
The following
stakeholders were
determined based on
Smiths worksheet (et al)
and on Mitchells Power,
Legitimacy and Urgency
model (1997, pg. 854).
Primary
Environmental and
conservation government
agencies: Parks Canada
and the ESRD. These
agencies have a highly
68
legitimate and urgent relationship with Miistakis since they request its services to review
legislation, create maps and develop plans for natural resource conservation. Also, this audience
has more power to influence the organizations than any other stakeholder.
Secondary
Private landowners: farmers and wealthy landowners. Canadian donors care more about
Canadas environment than ever before. Philanthropic support from private citizens for
environment charities has grown to an estimated $286 million (Easwaramoorthy, Barr, Gumulka, &
Hartford, 2006, p.2). This group has high legitimacy and power since their donations have no
conditions attached. Their level of urgency is medium since it depends on their need for Miistakis
services.
Tertiary
Corporate donors: oil and gas firms. In 2003, Albertas Mining and Oil and Gas was the
industry with the third largest donations to environmental organizations with 4.4 per cent of all the
corporate donations (Easwaramoorthy et al). This stakeholder has high urgency for Miistakis
research tools and a legitimate relationship with the organization. They have a medium level of
power determined by its project funding.
Categories of Publics
Using Smiths Categories of Publics model we grouped the audiences into Consumers,
Producers, Enablers and Limiters to identify their link with the organization (Smith, pg. 61-63).
69
Consumers
This category includes Miistakis current and former
customers such as private citizens and corporate landowners,
as well as any other bodies requesting the charitys services in
any given project. These bodies also include government
agencies, rural municipalities, First Nations communities, etc.
Producers
This category is comprised of funding bodies, corporate donors, individual donors and
potential donors, which provide funds for the organization without necessarily using its services.
Mount Royal University and the University of Calgary are current and former producers
respectively.
Enablers
These stakeholders allow Miistakis to operate by requesting and approving projects. The
aforementioned government agencies, rural municipalities, First Nations communities and reserves
fall into this category. Other groups in this stakeholder category are other NGOs, as well as
academics that seek out Miistakis expertise.
Limiters
This category is comprised of other NGOs and environmental non-profits as Miistakis
competition for funds.
70
Audience Segmentation
Demographic, Behavioural and Psychographic profiles
Government agencys decision makers

The Federal Sustainable Development Act suggests that Canada is moving towards
sustainable development and environmentally friendly policies to maximize the efficient use of
natural resources (Environment Canada, 2013). On the other hand, government decision makers
have a high income and medium ethnic influence. This group is comprised of dual income families
who are environmentally conscious and care about their health and nutrition (Environics, 2013).
Preferred communication channels: Mixture of traditional and digital media such as journals and
online publications, as well as websites, newsletters, PSAs and official project proposals.
Wealthy landowners
With a significant percentage of European, Asian and Middle Eastern immigrants, this group
is the second wealthiest cluster in Canada (Environics, 2013). Wealthy landowners are often middle
age, married couples with university level education. They are philanthropists who belong to
environmental, political and cultural groups and often donate to charity (et al). They have
university-aged children and own vacation cottages and lake houses (et al). Preferred
communication channels: Mixture of traditional and digital media. This group is subscribed to
online environmental magazines, podcasts and newsletters. Email marketing is favoured.
Farmers and ranchers
The rate of individuals of more than 55 years of age that prevails in this group continues to
increase (Stats Can, 2011). This group also has significantly more men than women and a low
ethnic presence. They are likely to live on small to medium sized farms with families of three
71
members in the household (et al). Operators of larger farms

(with $2 million or more in yearly revenues) are within the ages
of 50 and 54 years old (et al). Preferred communication
channel: Traditional media such as radio and TV news stations
and newspapers. Direct mail and telemarketing are favoured.
This group comprises the corporate social responsibility (CSR) and community investment
departments of large energy industry companies operating in Alberta. This group seeks green
solutions for its operations and reclamation projects through its CSR and shared value initiatives.
Preferred communication channels: digital and social media, as well as project proposals. Email
marketing is favoured.
Recommendations
According to Knox and Gruars Relationship Marketing Theory (2007, pg.115) organizations
need to build and strengthen its relationship with stakeholders beyond immediate transactions. A
two-way symmetric communication flow is necessary to build trust and craft long-term
relationships with stakeholders. Organizations need to open the lines of communication with its
audiences early and often, to ensure these key audiences are kept informed of the organizations
scope, services and tools. Alike, Bowen, Rawlins and Martins collaborative approach (2010, pg.73)
is used when organizations seek support and active participation from its audiences. In order to
engage stakeholders, Bowen et al. (2010) states the organization needs to put forward a value
proposition and show how its services benefit the audience. Many of Miistakis current customers
are not aware of all the services the organization offers, and often have misconceptions about its
goals, objectives and values. Using the Relationship Marketing Theory and Bowens Collaborative
72
approach (et al) we have drafted recommendations for ongoing communication of the organization
with its key publics.
Primary stakeholders high power, legitimacy and urgency.
Monitor closely and open communication lines. Provide a value proposition and exploit
Miistakis unique advantage. Reach through all suitable communication channels. Engage and
consult regularly through social and traditional media. Inform of changes in policy and decisionmaking. Increase their knowledge about Miistakis services and how they apply to them.
Secondary stakeholders high legitimacy and power, medium urgency
Keep informed communicate early and often. Engage this audience through readily available
channels (website, social media, etc.) Challenge their knowledge about your organization and
provide a value proposition.
Tertiary stakeholders high legitimacy and urgency, medium power
Closely monitor and approach with project proposals. Keep informed through readily available
channels and showcase unique advantage.
73
Appendix F: Communication Audit

Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to analyze and identify
current communication practices implemented at the Miistakis
Institute for the purpose of providing foundational research for
a reputational strategic communication plan. Formal and informal research is conducted to
compare current practices currently used by similar non-profit organizations to determine whether
Miistakis is implementing effective communication methods, models and tools available to enhance
its reputation, maintain current relationships and create a greater awareness to key publics about
its products and services. The conclusion of this paper will include recommendations based on the
outcome of research findings.
Introduction
We envision a world where communities have genuine access to the science and research
they need to make choices that promote healthy landscapes. We study the landscape in order to
help people conserve it. We also work to make innovative research accessible to communities and
decision makers (Miistakis, 2014). The following report is a communication audit to identify the
previous and current communication practices being used for internal and external
communications within Miistakis, a small non-profit organization. I will provide a brief analysis of
the organizations situation, organization, external environments and publics by referencing
Smiths steps one to three. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of communication
practices being used by other small non-profit organizations in an attempt to identify effective
methods, tools, resources and communication practices of assistance to Miistakis in meeting
organizational goals and objectives.
74
Situation Analysis
Miistakis is comprised of seven staff members that specialize in providing tools and resources
for those interested and actively playing a part in promoting conservation for environmental
purposes. At this time there is no designated communications department as the entire staff
works collectively on producing communication materials and strategies are a collaborative effort.
Materials consist of place cards, posters, newsletters and brochures. Strategies consist of webinars,
seminars and social media platforms. This presents a challenge for Miistakis, as it identifies the
limitations of communication expertise and knowledge necessary to: identify trends, implement
communication strategies, enhance organizational reputation and create awareness of the value of
its services. The result of this could lead in a decline of interest from current and potential
stakeholders and reduce its importance amongst competition. Sources indicate that non-profit
organizations are at a disadvantage because its products and services are in a competitive space
with limited financial resources, which often result in the lack of communicative strategies and
tools affordable and accessible to meet organizational goals and objectives. However, according to
secondary research, it is internal communication models and strategies that set the stage for
effective external communication, (Welch and Jackson, 2007).
The internal corporate communication dimension is defined as communication between an
organizations strategic managers and its internal stakeholder, designed to promote commitment
to the organization, a sense of belong to it, awareness of its changing environment and
understanding of its evolving aims, (Welch and Jackson, 2007).
Miistakis currently is unable to clarify individual strengths to a general audience. In order to
have a top down communication model internally, each staff member would be required to specify
its individual area of expertise and be able to articulate that information concisely to external
audiences. Therefore, it is essential to determine the internal communication supports that serve
to fit the organization based on size, resources, commitment and expertise before deciding on a
communication strategy.
75
Organizational Analysis
Findings from analyzing the organization resulted in
identifying the current perceived reputation, organizations
vision and mission, quality of product and services, tools used
to communicate organizational purpose and the organizations
niche in promoting the conservation of the environment.
Miistakis is perceived as a reputable organization providing credible research and is
recognized for its niche of translating research findings to better understand its purpose and
contents. Established in 1995, Miistakis has consistently provides research tools and resources by
utilizing its eight specialized staff. Miistakis operated with an annual budget of $858,450 in 2012
and $1,057,819 in 2013, (Annual report, Miistakis, 2014). This was concluded after conducting
interviews with staff members and identifying partnerships and stakeholders.
Current communication platforms currently used by Miistakis include Twitter, Facebook,
YouTube, a blog, brochures, seminars, webinars, symposiums, posters, word-of-mouth and emails.
Through analyzing the communication vehicles and collateral, it is apparent that Miistakis is not
properly maintaing its communication output. According to Miistakis, there are approximately
1000 subscribers to its e-newsletter to date. However, Facebook and twitter do not have numbers
that align with its newsletter subscribers. Facebook, established in 2010, has 116 likes whereas
twitter, established in 2011, has 393 followers and 181 active followings. The Facebook page
includes a blog which is neither visible on its main website, nor used in distributed communication
material. Additionally, Miistakis distributes brochures, posters and place cards to provide
information about its organizational vision and mission. However, not all communication collateral
provides a visible identification of the social media platforms nor do they communicate Mistakes
Institutes brand. Brochures, which consist of an open concept, includes five inserts with Facebook
and Twitter logos located on the back side of the package, posters are age appropriate, content
76
divided but lack Miistakis Institutes brand and identity. Place cards change every year and are
scarce in supply. Lastly, it was discovered, through client meetings, that communication collateral
is given to clients after securing a project as opposed to using it to generate projects.
Overall, its apparent through research, (Keeping up with the digital age: How the
American Red Cross uses social media to build relationships, 2011), that the mere existence of
social media platforms and communication tools and methods does not guarantee that the key
messages are being received.
Research also indicates, Increasingly, organizations in both the business and nonprofit
sectors are looking to social media sites like Facebook and Twitter not to improve how they
communicate with relevant stakeholders, but to be more effective in what they communicate and
when, (Greenberg and MacAulay, 2009). This may in fact pose a challenge for Miistakis as it is
constantly competing for exposure and recognition in a small non-profit sector.
Additionally, it is noted that dialogue vs. monologue communication has proven to engage
audiences by providing a two-way communication system that allows interaction between both the
sender and receiver. Therefore, proper implementation used with consistent visibility of social
media platforms will provide Miistakis with an opportunity to create a two-way dialogical model of
communication with its current and potential stakeholders, donors and publics. An analysis was
conducted to determine the reading level of written content of About Us on its websites main page
and on a staff written piece in the e-newsletter, summer edition 2014, (Readability formulas,
2014). The website content of About Us rated at a grade 12 reading level with an approximate age
of readability as 17-18 years of age. The e-newsletter content, summer edition 2014 rated at a
grade 15 reading level with an age of readability as a college graduate. This does not align with
the current stakeholder, audience and public demographic currently or previously in use of
Miistakis Institutes services.
Research found, Canadian environmental nonprofit organizations appear to be locked in a
broadcast paradigm-they are using its online presence to disseminate messages broadly to a mass
77
audience but are doing little in the way of using its web
presence to foster a two-way flow of communication,
(Greenberg and MacAulay, 2009).
Therefore, it is recommended that Miistakes make its
social media platforms a priority by utilizing its current
relationships with partners and academic resources to create a
dialogic communication platform using the tools and resources
already available. Maintaining its social media presence, modifying content readability and
monitoring the audience participation can enhance its reputation as a leader in the environmental
conservation resource industry with a niche in translating findings based on scientific research.
Oppositional Environment
Although no direct opposition was found it does not eliminate the possibility of future
interference. Possibilities of opposition may include those who disagree with scientific methods
used in research and those attempting to bypass research in meeting its own individual or
organizational objectives.
This presents an opportunity for Miistakis to form a stronger relationship with current
stakeholders and publics and can set the tone for establishing new relationships, enhancing its
reputation and increasing awareness among target audiences.
Analysis of Publics
Through analyzing the key publics of Miistakis, insight and understanding of the
stakeholders, donors, past and present consumers and external publics such as the media were
identified. Stakeholders consist of partners and donors who have an industry specific interest and
are financially invested. Consumers primarily consist of those with a shared interest in the services
Miistakis provides, which include landowners, environmental government agencies, academic
78
institutions, and communities that have project specific interest. The media consists of message
dissemination opportunities such as television, magazines and podcasts. It was determined that
Miistakis doesnt utilize the available media resources due to a lack of contacts, time and
resources.
Absence of media resources presents an opportunity for Miistakis, as it is an untapped
resource. Research provided a variety of options of marketing tools that Miistakis may implement
at little or no cost. As well, partnering with an organization that is able to provide financial support,
media resources and pro-bono services may be beneficial to Miistakis in trying to reach its
organizational goals and objectives. For example, successful ad campaigns such as Smokey Bear
and McGruff the crime dog credit The Ad Council for supporting its efforts by providing funding and
pro-bono services, (Henley, 2001).
Traditional media such as television, billboards and newspaper ads may not appeal to a non-profit
organization because of the extensive costs related. However, media tools such as PSAs, radio
ads, internet conferences, special events and magazines provide an opportunity to market any
organization at little or no cost (Henley, 2001), Internet conferences can be held for members who
may not have the time or money to attend meetings or special events. (Henley, 2001).
Additionally, Henley mentioned the benefits of local universities and colleges as a valuable
resource to non-profit organizations, Another outstanding resource is local colleges and
universities or high schools. Students in advertising, marketing and graphic design may be willing
to take on a project as part of a service learning component of a class or for a small stipend.
Therefore, it is recommended that Miistakis consider these options and nurture the existing
resources available when implementing a communication plan. Miistakis has the advantage of
being currently located on the campus of Mount Royal University, a post secondary institution
located in Calgary, Alberta. Its location provides an opportunity to tap into programs such as
graphic design, marketing, public relations, journalism and broadcasting. However, there needs to
be additional research conducted to narrow down specific demographics and psychographics of the
79
target audience in which Miistakis intends to communicate its

key messages. Considerations should be given to age,
education, location, shared interest and income.
Conclusion
The best communication practices being used are not
limited to just one but rather a collective of various tools and
methods. The key to implementing a communication plan relies on the support from internal
forces. Firstly, Miistakis must acknowledge the importance of making communications a priority.
Secondly, establish, implement and monitor communication platforms, vehicles and collateral to
create a dialogue rather than monologue communication system. Lastly, utilize available resources
and media outlets to deliver key messages and to identify, through further research, target
audiences.
Appendix G: Best Practices
80
Abstract
This paper will identify and discuss the current practices that non-profit organizations similar
to Miistakis are using to develop and maintain strong reputations, raise awareness, and increase
funding. It looks at research that supports the current trends of developing a strong internet and
social media presence, marketing communications skills, and new programs being adopted to
reach organizational goals and visions. The conclusion of this paper will include recommendations
based on the outcome of research findings.
Introduction
Miistakis is a non-profit research institute and a conservation charity that supplies natural
resource and land managers with the scientific information they need to make any environmental
decisions (About us, para.1). The professional groups seeking this information include: provincial
environment agencies, private landowners, parks departments, municipalities, and many more
(para.2). It provides decision makers with data sets, maps, charts, graphs, peer-reviewed articles
and executive summaries to help transfer knowledge on specific projects that are in the beginning
and planning stages (para.2). Miistakis plays a key role in scientifically investigating conservation
dilemmas, analyzing policy implications, developing decision support tools and catalyzing
community conservation action. These actions may take place separately or as a whole, based on
which project they are assisting on (About us, para.3).
Offering such a wide variety of complex and scientific knowledge, data and tools, Miistakis
way of communicating and educating people on who it is and what it does is falling short of other
similar organizations.
While there is no single definition of a best practices for every non-profit organization, there
are common practices being utilized creating successful outcomes for non-profit organizations. One
major area for raising awareness and reputation is social media. Miistakis is a research institute
81
and a conservation charity that has yet to tap into the vast
world of marketing and the endless strategies to raise
awareness of its organization. In researching similar non-profit
organizations for best practices, common trends and practices
became apparent.
Trends and Currents Practices
The research conducted was on non-profit organizations with a goal to look specifically at wildlife
or animal conservations charities as well as environmental non-profits. The three organizations
chosen to do further research on current best practices were the World Wildlife Fund, The Humane
Society of the United States, and The Wildlife Conservation Society of Canada. These organizations
where chosen because they align closely to Miistakis and what it represents. The organizations are
similar because they are environmental and wildlife conversations as well as registered charities.
After analyzing the listed non-profit originations, many successful strategies, tactics and
communication tools became apparent. Many similar practices in raising awareness and reputation
are common within the three organizations and Miistakis has a great opportunity to take part in
them. When looking at the non-profit organizations, social media is the most apparent sources of
communication that is being implemented. This is being done by developing and maintaining a
strong online presence and building a strong presence on multiple social media channels.
By visiting The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) social media platforms of YouTube, Facebook, and
Twitter, the success of developing and maintaining a strong online presence becomes apparent. It
has implemented some of these strategies by developing a strong presence on these platforms by
promoting campaigns, up-to-date news, and to raise funds and can be measured by the number of
active audience. The Facebook account currently has 4,473 visits and 137,903 likes, Twitter with
12.7k tweets and 34.8k followers and is currently active on YouTube with 2,822 subscribers.
82
When visiting The Humane Society of the United States social media platforms, its strong
online presence through social media became clear when clicking on the different platforms
offered. Fundraising campaigns and current events were marketed on the Facebook site which was
accompanied by 2, 214,863 likes, 22.1k tweets and 294k followers. The organizations YouTube
channel highlighted past events and current animals up for adoption and was accompanied by 79,
508 subscribers.
The Wildlife Conservation Society of Canada also has a strong presence on social media. It
posts videos and pictures of animals to draw attention to its work protecting wildlife on YouTube
and Facebook with 267 likes and 1,250 subscribers. According to Charity Intelligence Canada
(2013), The Wildlife Conversation Society Canada is Canadas top wildlife protection charity in
Canada (pg.3).
To examine current trends and best practice using social media of non-profit organizations
further, The Water is life organizations social media strategies were looked at because it too is a
registered charity and is similar to what Miistakis represents. According to the Nonprofit Hub
website (2014), some of the major successful non-profit campaigns are taking place via trending
hashtags (para.1). The Water is Life organizations success came from making a video and
connecting it to a popular, trending hashtag called First World Problems (para.6). The quickly
spreading hashtag, now connected with Water is Life, was used as a vehicle to spread Water is
Lifes message to new audiences and publics. It exposed the organization as a whole and its need
for donations to more people than it could have asked individually, which resulted in record
breaking donations (para.5). It put itself in the mind set of new audiences and is now able to
obtain new fund development with ease. Connecting an organization to trends will expose the
organization to a larger pool of publics and allow organizations to begin increasing awareness
(Nonprofit Hub, 2014, para.10).
Based on further research, another common practice that was being implemented by the
non-profits previously listed was the use of interactive, easy to use websites. When examining the
83
different sites, the engaging pictures and simple texts were

common throughout. The navigation of a website should be
easy resulting in the overall satisfaction of its many users
(Newman et al., 2010, p1). It is important that the visitors are
able to locate the necessary information as soon as possible,
without searching through heaps of extra information (Newman
et al., 2010, p15). Each website examined, offers information
about various programs and initiatives they support, current projects underway and where you can
find them. When looking at each home page, it includes links to all supporting social media and
any link to external content. Links to donate, become a member, volunteer, and other ways to
help the organization are highlighted. This is a common trend among these specific organizations.
Websites can be used as the hub of all information, directing visitors or potential donors to multiple
social media outlets. Miistakis has the opportunity to adopt these strategies to gain new
partnerships, raise awareness, and to enhance its reputation and donations.
As examined in Smiths step two of the External Environment, there are many non-profit
organizations that are competing for the same mind space and funding (Smith, 2013 p. 47). It is
explained that in highly competitive environments, communication tactics are important when
trying to highlight an organizations niche, uniqueness, and differences among competitors (Smith,
2013 p .47). Miistakis has a great opportunity to implement these successful communication
practices specifically social media, to highlight what it is that stands it apart from competitors. It
could allow Miistakis to examine what path it should take to highlight its uniqueness and help
develop a stronger presence on social media. Miistakis has multiple qualities and services such as:
every employee has a specialized knowledge on a specific service that they offer also, that they
are the only research institute that offers such a wide variety of specialized resources allowing for
any type customer to obtain the information they need. Miistakis is a one-stop shop for any needed
research pertaining to the conservation of wildlife and landscapes. These characteristics arent
84
being highlighted and marketed through social media as well as it could be. Its current online
presence consists of 117 likes on Facebook, 302 followers on Twitter, and one subscriber on
YouTube. Recognizing and adopting these practices, Miistakis will benefit as a charitable non-profit
organization by attracting the donors, individuals and communities that the organization is looking
to obtain more of.
Literature Review
There is a growing importance for non-profit organizations to develop an online presence defined
as ePhilanthropy (Hart, Greenfield, & Johnston, 2005). It examines how every charitable
organization can analyze its options and select the appropriate strategy to integrate traditional
marketing, communications, and fundraising practices through its online presence (Hart,
Greenfield, & Johnston, 2005, p. 15).
ePhilanthropy is defined as an ongoing process of communicating, educating, cultivating and
soliciting non-profit supporters to build and enhance stronger relationships(Hart, Greenfield, &
Johnston, 2005, p. 15). Stated in this reading, the implementation of this strategy resulted in many
non-profits seeing improvements by focusing on:
1. The relationship: integrate all messages to supporters.
2. Give supporters a reason to visit you online.
3. Interact with supporters; dont just send messages.
4. Communicate using multiple methods.
5. Access and improve performance.
Miistakis is in the position to apply this strategy to build new relationships, enhance its
reputation, and awareness by implementing ongoing communications on current or upcoming
projects. Miistakis could communicate what it is doing and how it is benefiting the wildlife or
environment. Miistakis has the opportunity to enhance its current social media platforms and begin
85
to interact with its current supporters by tweeting daily news,

posting pictures on Facebook and creating interesting videos
on YouTube. By interacting with supporters and creating new
worthy information, it will allow for Miistakis to begin reaching
new audiences. By improving is content on its current website
and newsletter, it will become a more engaging site and easier
to understand. Miistakis can apply this strategy by correcting
its website and using it as a hub of information that directs visitors to its variety of social media
platforms.
John Burnetts (2007) highlights two key styles in marketing communications. First, the
intention of the communication is to present a persuasive message with a goal to create
uniqueness in the mind of the targeted audience (p. 213). Secondly, marketing communications
can be divided into external and internal communications, which are directed at different
audiences (p.214). In today's fast- paced and quick-to-change economic climate, every non-profit
organization needs a foundational marketing strategy that increases awareness and support
(Burnett, 2007, pg. 215). Non-profit Marketing Best Practices examines successful marketing tools
and techniques that have helped non-profit stand out among the growing number of similar
organizations.
Social media usage is beneficial for non-profit organizations for several reasons. (American
Red Cross uses social media to build relationships, 2011). Social media allows for non-profit
organizations to deepen its already established relationships, educate the public about programs
and services, and communicate with the public (pg.2). We are currently emerging in digital age
and as social media tools are becoming mainstream, organizations must update its strategies and
tactics to build relationships with publics such as volunteers, the media, and the community (pg.6).
Research Findings
86
Research indicates that the most successful communication practices come in the forms of
marketing communications, ephilanthropy tools, and implementing multiple social media
platforms. One cannot limit the best communication practices being used by non-profits to one
definition. The apparent trends seen in the research include: Developing a strong presence on the
Internet by utilizing multiple social media platforms. In doing so this allows organizations to
interact with current supporters and connect key messages to trending topics. This can be done
through Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. This has the potential to enhance the organizations
awareness and obtain mind space in new publics. Creating effective and user friendly websites,
and differentiating communication strategies between stakeholders and customers are important
factors in developing relationships and enhancing reputation. When looking at some of the leading
non-profit organizations, it is clear that they have adopted some if not all of the tools and
techniques outlined in the research.
Conclusion
Miistakis has a great opportunity to implement the current practices explained in this paper with
the purpose of enhancing awareness and reputation among current stakeholders and potential
donors. By implementing these strategies, Miistakis could develop new relationships and begin to
interact with key audiences via social media. The lack of strategic planning currently facing
Miistakis has created multiple opportunities for developing a new face online. The opportunity lies
in the fact that it is starting with a clean slate, allowing for the building and development of
marketing strategies, social media campaigns, and creating an interactive website.
I recommend Miistakis to target its desired audiences and tailor its messages accordingly
based on which social media platform it is are utilizing. It has the opportunity to establish its
unique voice through the world of communications. There are multiple outlets that have also
shown beneficial and are waiting for Miistakis to utilize them.
87

Miistakis Strat Comm Plan (Client Copy)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Miistakis Strat Comm Plan (Client Copy)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

November

Miistakis Research Institute

4841. Allison MacKenzie

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

It is anticipated that this plan will launch January 2015

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

APPENDIX A: TEAM PROFILES................................................................................................53

communication materials consist of postcards, posters,

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

Miistakis has specialized knowledge on eight different areas, which gives it an

To implement a strategic plan that gives Miistakis the

To strengthen Miistakis branding through social media,

To commit to consistent communications to inform and engage its key publics.

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

that concerns its land and provide funding for projects.

Stakeholder analysis tools

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

income and medium ethnic influence. This group is comprised

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

2. Touches the heart breakthrough nonprofit brands put a

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

Trends and Best Practices

success, which Miistakis can do by fully engaging in the social

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

Traditional media channels

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

provide Miistakis with an opportunity to create a two-way of

Goals and Objectives

1. Reputational Goal Primary audience

To enhance the organizations reputation within the environmental non-profit sector.

2. Reputational Goal Secondary Audience

Generating newsworthy information (Ongoing and systematic use and monitoring of

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

Primary stakeholders: Government agencies

Secondary stakeholder: Private landowners

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

wildlife habitat, and exploring adaptive management for

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

3.5. Provide social proof partners and customer pull

ORGANIZATIONAL MEDIA - Awareness objectives

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

ORGANIZATIONAL MEDIA - Acceptance objectives

Audience feedback Primary stakeholders

Social media monitoring

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

Interactive use of social media platforms, daily

2. Environmental / Conservation surveys

Post environmental surveys on social media platforms

INTERPERSONAL COMM- Action

Attend conference with current partners

Developing a volunteer bank

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

Objective: Awareness objectives

How many people

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

mandate and its

Objective: Acceptance objectives

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

about specific focus

nature and number

events and seek