Internal document

Version 1.8

Changing leverage
Transitioning from offline to online support

Written by Nicolas Krul 1181811

CO/Nicolas Krul 9/8/2012 Page 1 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Foreword
I would like to thank a few people for helping me through this project. I couldnt have done it without the help of Marije Visee, the project manager e-campaigning of Fairfood International. Her continued support helped me focus on what was important for the organization. Her patience helped me get started again at times that I lost all motivation. Secondly I would like to thank my project supervisor Rentate van der Meer, who guided me onto the right tracks for understanding what I needed to search for. Furthermore I would very much like to thank Bob Overbeeke, Communication manager of Oxfam Novib, and Elroy Bos, Head of Communications of Greenpeace for their time to answer a few questions which were crucial for the progress and direction of this project. This project was aimed at improving the communication strategy of Fairfood International. All recommendations are based on the situation as it was in 2010-2011. Since then the strategy has probably already been improved. Nonetheless I hope there are still some recommendations that might be very much applicable.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 2 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Table of contents
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 About Fairfood International 1.2 Background information 1.3 Purpose of this research project 1.4 Structure of this document 2: EXPLORATION 2.1 Should Fairfood use social media? 2.2 Using international networks 2.3 Risks of online support 2.4 Activism in the 21th century 2.5 Summary 3: PROBLEM DEFINITION 3.1 Defining the problem 3.2 Advice Question 3.3 Methodology 3.4 Definitions 4: INTERNAL ANALYSIS 4.1 Developments in the communication strategy 4.2 Mission 4.3 Vision 4.4 Online Strategy 4.5 Target Groups 4.6 How does Fairfood gather online support? 4.7 Summary 5: EXTERNAL ANALYSIS 5.1 Survey 5.2 Analysis 5.3 Social media usage of other non-profits 5.4 Crowdsourcing and Co-creation 5.5 Communicating with supporters 5.6 Increasing participation and gathering petitions trough social media 5.7 Conclusion 6: STRATEGY 6.1 Using Social media effectively through crowdsourcing 6.2 Focus 6.2.1. The constraining attributes I. Business needs II. Customer Participants III. Organizational capabilities 6.2.2. The defining attributes IV. Scope V. Scale VI. Depth 6.2.3. Cross-examination 5 6 6 6 7 8 9 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

18 19 19 20 20 22 23 23 25 26 26 30 30 32 32 35 36 37 39 41

42

43

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 3 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.3 Language 6.3.1. Social Objects 6.3.2 Social Interaction 6.3.3. Company Presence 6.4 Incentives 6.4.1. Intrinsic incentives 6.4.2. Extrinsic subjective incentives 6.4.3. Extrinsic objective incentives 6.4.4. Motivation and rewards 6.5. Rules 6.5.1. Rules of access and initiation 6.5.2. Intellectual property & Legal issues 6.6. Tools 6.6.1. Platform 6.6.2. Creation 6.6.3. Monitoring 6.7. Contributors 6.8 Conclusion 7: RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 Recommendations 7.2 Summary 7.3 Bibliography 8: APPENDIX 8.1 Interview questions 8.2 Interview Oxfam Novib 8.3 Interview Greenpeace 8.4 Social Media Survey

44 44 44 45 46 46 46 47 47 49 49 50 51 51 51 52 54 56 57 58 59 61

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 4 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

1: INTRODUCTION

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 5 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

1.1 About Fairfood International

Fairfood International (from here on it will be called Fairfood) is a non-profit campaign and lobby organization, which encourages the food and beverage industry to increase the level of sustainability of its products. In this way, Fairfood contributes to the fight against hunger and poverty across the globe. Fairfood is in contact with more than 1300 companies in over 60 1 countries worldwide to encourage them to increase the level of sustainability of its products. Fairfood approaches the brand owners of brand products instead of the retailers. The retailers are only the distributors of the products whereas the brand owners decide the production and ingredients. Fairfood concentrates on the level of sustainability in these areas because this is where labor is often exploited and workers are treated inhumane. The level of sustainability that Fairfood pursues affects workers around the globe, but also the environment where soil and water is being contaminated or where forests are being removed for purely economic reasons. Fairfood utilizes the voice of the consumers as leverage against companies in the food and beverage industry. People can either show their support by becoming a supporter or by assisting during certain events or Fairfood stunts. But its understandable that not everyone has as much free time to support Fairfood. Luckily petitions provide a great solution as a tool to convince companies to try and alter their methods of producing food.

1.2 Background information

My previous internship at Fairfood was partly concerned with the creation of a uniform design for social networks like Ning or Hyves, but also the content sharing applications like YouTube. Working with these online platforms already spiked an interest in me about possible uses of these social networks for non-profit organizations. The potential is in my opinion huge if you invest time and effort in maintaining a solid network for supporters. But the difficulty lies in how all the applications can be combined and used in a productive way. For my final project for my studies in communication management, I figured it would only be logical to combine my interest in social media my interest in NGOs like Fairfood where Ive worked before in the past. The field of communications is getting more and more complicated these days now the internet is developing at an incredibly fast rate. Non-profit organizations are just getting to know the possible applications of all the free tools and knowledge in the online world. I want to understand how other organizations work with these tools so I can help Fairfood and perhaps other organizations and at the same time increase my knowledge of the online social world.

1.3 Purpose of this research project

At Fairfood, it was suggested that it would be ideal if these social media applications could be used for collecting online petitions. Until now mostly offline approaches have been tried, and past recommendations of project leaders call for a more online approach, because of low material investments and because Fairfood wants a global group of supporters since they became an international organization in 2009. In the recent months NGOs have received more and more media attention about their social media integration within their communication strategies. Interviewing a few NGOs about their successes can possibly help Fairfood explore other ways of gathering online support. This is where might crowdsourcing comes in. Utilizing the wisdom of the masses, to help the goals of Fairfood and bring it to the next level. Especially during times of crisis where nonprofits all over the world are being impacted by a decrease in donations and cuts in subsidy budgets,
1

Fairfood Interactive 0.9.doc

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 6 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

social media seems to be the way towards a clear line of communication between the non-profits and the supporters. Fairfoods goal to make the world of food more sustainable can be supported by activist all over the world, who only need a platform for their knowledge and skills to make the world more sustainable. This change in view might be an improvement on how support traditionally was approached. New developments have indicated there is room for creative solutions and increased cooperation with the supporters.

1.4 Structure of this document

The structure of this document is divided into 8 parts:

1: Introduction Background information about Fairfood International and the purpose of this report. 2: Exploration This is where several characteristics of online activism and the use of petitions will be examined in order to provide a clearer view of the problem that suggested. 3: Problem Definition The problem will be defined here for clarifying further research options and scope. 4: Internal Analysis This section explains the communication strategy of Fairfood International and the state of online support of the organization. 5: External Analysis This is where the results of the survey will be discussed, as well as the interviews that were conducted with the head of communications of two different organizations. 6: Strategy In this section the solution to the problem will be presented. The Flirt Model will be discussed as well as its applications 7: Recommendations The final recommendations and a summary of this report will be presented in this section 8: Appendix The survey and the interviews can be found in this section

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 7 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

2. EXPLORATION

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 8 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

2.1 Developments of social media

In the past decade the growth of social media networks has changed the way we use the internet. People like to share what they see and read with their friends and colleagues, and often start discussions about it. Kids use their mobile phone during class just to look at their Facebook notifications, to see if anyone has replied to a photo which was uploaded. The social change has shifted the focus of control to the users. Websites incorporated buttons which it possible for visitors to share the content on the website with friends in one of the many networks available. Smartphones are now making it even easier to stay connected to the web while people are on the move, so people will stay in touch with their online social network. The two terms Social Media and Social Networking Services are sometimes used as meaning the same thing. However, they are two quite different things. Lon Cohen asserts that Social 2 media are an outlet for broadcasting and can be called a strategy. Social networking on the other hand is a tool for connecting with other people. For example, Facebook is primarily a networking tool. People can connect with each other regardless of distance, and find all kinds of media and information on someones profile page. Granted that there is a profile of that person, the purpose is to share different kinds of information. YouTube has some characteristics of Facebook, however its main function isnt to connect people, but is more about broadcasting videos to the internet and sharing interesting videos from other people among friends. Social media is most often used as an umbrella term for all kinds of web 2.0 services which perform different functions, in this sense social media is seen as a strategy. Social networking systems can appear in the form of websites. But in recent years with the huge increase in mobile internet use, applications for the iPhone or Android systems have adopted these social aspects to increase usage between users. Some applications modeled after old-fashioned board games even require these socials networking services, as they are an integral part of long-distance gaming.

2.2 Using international networks

Fairfood is currently using only a few online social network services compared to the number of active social networks globally. Still picking the right social networks and tools are crucial to build up a vast international network that supports Fairfood and its goals. Facebook has grown immensely since its startup. Already in 2011 the company reported 750 million monthly active 3 users. Many other social network services have risen and grown in addition to Facebook. In the Netherlands, the preferred service was Hyves, which is still growing every day. Not surprisingly China on the other hand has four big social network services on its own. While at the same time the country is blocking most major internet services such as Google, Twitter and Facebook, it gave its own people the opportunity to start alternatives for the biggest players in the field. Google was replaced by Baidu. Twitter was replaced by Weibo. Facebook was replaced by RenRen, Qzone, Kaixin001 and 51.com. The market isnt dominated by a singular social network. Many different social network services have gathered respectable user bases, or have already disappeared from the internet. The constant developing landscape of social media requires constant attention if an organization uses the services in their strategy. New players can steal users rather quickly from other networks in a matter of weeks. Google for example launched its own social network in June 2011. After only 4 three weeks it already gained 20 million registered users according to a comScore analysis.
2 3

http://lonscohen.com/blog/2009/04/difference-between-social-media-and-social-networking/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/23/facebook-750-million-users/ 4 http://blog.comscore.com/2011/07/google-plus_twenty_million_visitors.html

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 9 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Figures like these seem interesting for its potential as an uprising social network service. However, little data is often available about the overlap between services, the number of active users, or its future potential. The social network world is still growing and changing quickly. This year Facebook is still the biggest social network service that exists. But next year it could very well lose its prestigious place at the top. Friendster was on track to become the biggest social network, but its growth declined rapidly and users switched to other services very rapidly. What Danah Boyd captures wonderfully in her dissertation is the mindset of teens in the social network world. Teens who are very susceptible to trends or may even bring forth a new one, voiced their 5 opinion to her about why they changed from Friendster to Facebook. What matters for Fairfood will become clear later on in the chapter about crowdsourcing. The ever changing world means that Fairfood needs to be aware of the changes that are happening. Secondly, for an optimal international reach, its important to consider other social networks in other languages. A country like china for example blocks certain western services or products for its citizens. This is a strategic move that enables companies residing in China to launch similar services. For an organization like Fairfood, this means that to reach the Chinese people, it needs to expand to other social network services. It follows that content targeted at supporters or potential supporters should be designed with the limitations and possibilities of all important social network services.

2.3 Risks of online support

The online signing of petitions might be a successful solution for getting the required leverage. However there are still risks attached with using online channels. The first problem of online petitioning is the absence of a fool-proof security system. Online there is no possibility of signing a petition with your normal autograph. This is currently a limitation posed by available hardware. On the other hand, its not possible to have a viable software alternative, as this could be a problem regarding the privacy of online users. Any individual could sign multiple petitions because there is no way of telling who signed which petition. All required fields for input can always be faked if needed. Using a popular social network could circumvent this problem. Unfortunately this too has its own difficulties. The popular network Facebook has multiple ways of affiliating with a certain individual or group. One could use the like button on the specified profile to send an approval of its content and creates a connection between the two parties. Fairfood could use this like feature for support related activities. However, the danger lies in its simplicity. Every item on the internet can be liked if the website supports the function. The ease of the functions usability introduces the problem of the lack of effort an individual expresses. Simply liking Fairfood, doesnt mean this person understands the cause Fairfood stands for. In the past it has proven very difficult for Fairfood to retain supporters after theyve signed a petition. Little additional support has been offered, and other options like subscribing to the newsletter are easily ignored. Newsletters might have become less popular in this day and age, but perhaps social networks will prove to be the successor of an old medium in the near future. The whole point of determining the risks of online petitions is to be able to secure a basis for petition signing. With current image problems surrounding initiatives to support online charities or non-profit organizations requiring little effort for participating, online petitioning could receive negative criticism from brand owners or perhaps financiers if done improperly. Fairfood could design a general guideline for online petitions for determining clear goals, fair practices and the
5

D. Boyd, (2008), Taken out of Context, California, blz 135.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 10 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

prevention of privacy issues. However, in combination with the media possibilities that are now open, it seems that there are much more creative ways of gaining support.

2.4 Activism in the 21th century

The act of doing good on social networks has received some negative attention mainly because the ease of the way people can show their support for a certain cause. Slacktivism is a new term which has only been around for only a few years. It combines the words slacker and activism as a new term to define those actions which require almost no effort at all to support a humanistic purpose or cause. Wikipedia gives examples like: Joining a Facebook group, wearing a wristband (given by a certain cause) or altering your personal data or avatar. There are probably many more you could place under the umbrella of slacktivism, but the question still arises and is discussed often: Is slacktivism a bad thing? The big problem of slacktivism is the notion of doing as little effort to bring about some change in the world, just by clicking the mouse when youre sitting behind your computer. Small actions like joining a Facebook Cause are pointless because it seemingly generates no further action of the new member. Micah White of The Guardian says: The insider truth is that the vast majority, 6 between 80% to 90%, of so-called members rarely even open campaign emails. Although a thorough dissertation about the actual benefits of online petition gathering is out of the scope of this analysis, the whole discussion shows problems which could be addressed preliminary. As a precaution for critique in the direction of Fairfood about the validity of the online petitions, Fairfood could for example establish a set of guidelines as a basis for petition acquisition. There are examples where the dark side of Slacktivism is shown. A Danish psychologist Anders Colding-Jorgensen performed and experiment on Facebook. He started a Facebook group that implied a certain fountain would be removed. But it never stated explicitly that the city authorities planned this action. The group was seeded to a modest 125 people, but it much larger in a short time. After a day there were 1000 members which ultimately grew with over 2 members a minute. At 27.500 members the experiment was halted. In the end, all those people joined a Facebook group for a cause which is mostly of regional interest which wasnt even real. Even with all the critiques that online activism has received, the internet still has the potential to expand the communication channels organization such as Fairfood can use. Slacktivism seems to be more of a term which is used for lazy activism. It is a word which resembles the bad side of online communication which promotes a certain cause. What matters with online activism is that there is more than just the likes of a Facebook page. People will have to be activated to do more than show their interest. They should be motivated to do something substantial. But there have to be a way for them to do that.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/12/clicktivism-ruining-leftist-activism

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 11 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

2.5 Conclusion
Social networks are still constantly changing. Facebook has grown immensely since its birth, and has served Fairfoods goals well in the past. Facebook has become a service that certainly seems dependable in the long term. This could change however, since certain other well-known social network services disappeared after a few years or even months despite their popularity. On the other hand some services could have an interesting potential for future campaigns because of their unique and creative properties. The rise of smartphones definitely has made an impact in the growth of these services and should be further researched. Social network services all have their own target groups. Language is often a big part of what determines who joins which network. Facebook is the largest in the world, but it mostly accommodates English speaking people. Branching out to other networks presents the opportunity for Fairfood to explore other cultures and gain new followers. Petitions were a popular tool for converting support into something of substance. In the online world however, they are not at the same level of usefulness as the offline counterpart. Online petitions have the problem of not being able to guarantee that the signees are real. The other difficulty that is present is that the threshold for signing is too low. Signing a petition can be reduced to a single click of a button, which does not show the same level of support as someone who consciously signed up for supporting a certain cause. This means that the leverage cultivated through petitions will possibly have a weaker force than their traditional form. There have been a lot of critics of online activism. Most have touched upon the issues presented. Others have shown that the message of the charity or cause is does not have to be factually correct or even has to exist. Bogus campaigns and low threshold of participation have damaged the reputation of online activism in the form of petitions. Luckily social media offers other opportunities for creative ways of showing support.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 12 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

3. Problem definition
In this section the question that Fairfood asked will be further refined for further research. The methodology and several definitions will be explained as well, for further explanations regarding this report.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 13 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

3.1 Defining the problem

An organization like Fairfood International depends heavily on the amount of leverage it can attain. Campaigns are often designed to attract attention from consumers, who will then be able to be informed about the problems Fairfood is concerned about. The interest of the consumer is required for the most important goal of the campaign: to convince company executives to stop their unfair and unsustainable practices, and change them into more sustainable practices. Fairfood however has changed from a mostly national organization to a fully international organization. It will no longer be the case that campaigns will be supported by locally organized events or stunts. Those events will be far too expensive if they will be organized all over the world. In addition, support for the organization till 2009 has mostly been expressed in the form of petitions. To accommodate for the change to an international level, new inexpensive options will have to be explored which can gather the support. In the case of Fairfood, new opportunities will have to be found to be able to increase its publicity, popularity and leverage. The obvious place to look for these opportunities is the internet. However, it will be far more difficult than simply posting information about the campaigns and the goals on the website. The problem which Fairfood is facing is firstly, how to attract attention from people all over the world. Then this attention will have to be turned into some form of support for the organization or the goals that are being pursued. Finally, this support will have to be able to provide the leverage needed to convince the companies. This research project will focus on the possible channels that the internet can offer, and how these channels can be used for the benefit of Fairfood to gain support internationally.

3.2 Advice Question

The result of the exploration has turned the request of Fairfood into a question that will be answered at the end of this report. In order to be able to answer this question, several research questions have been developed for further research. What method does Fairfood International have to use in order to reach a larger audience and activate them to support the organization? Research questions: How are petitions currently being gathered online at Fairfood? How are supporters currently able to support Fairfood? What communication strategy is Fairfood employing What channels do other NGOs use and what are their possibilities? What are the desires and interests of current supporters? What other methods can collect support from the citizens How can the support of the citizens be turned into leverage?

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 14 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

3.3 Methodology
Desk Research A lot of the work is based on findings and examples from other non/for profit organizations. Since academic research is scarce on this subject, cases were studied to determine the direction of this research so that would be applicable to Fairfood. A lot of different blogs and excerpts from books were used in order to get the latest consensus on the current state of the ever expanding world of social media. Interviews For information about the applications of social media Ive interviewed two organizations who are the most active in the online social world and have the most experience developing and executing campaigns online. Elroy Bos from Greenpeace and Bob Overbeeke of Oxfam Novib were kind enough to share their views on how to employ social media in a non-profit organization and how to benefit from the support the public is willing to give. The interviews targeted cases that have been featured in the media and successfully reached their intended goal. They seemed to have successfully integrated the crowdsourcing business model. Work experience at Fairfood International A large part of the research was done at the office of Fairfood in Amsterdam. Here I could see the structure and the processes of the communication department first hand. This allowed me to better understand the requirements and the difficulties that come with designing a campaign for non-profit purposes. Internally, the goals and structure has changed a lot since my first internship at Fairfood. Even while working there the system was changed to an online-only campaigning direction due to subsidy developments. Survey A small survey of 15 questions was launched on the Facebook page of Fairfood. This was targeted at the fans who expressed their interest in following updates from Fairfood. The purpose was to gain information about the interests and desires, which would benefit Fairfood in adjusting its policy and usage of social media. The other benefit was to understand how eager people are to help the organization, and what their contributions could be.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 15 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

3.4 Definitions
Web 2.0 Even though this term did not originate from a technical upgrade for the internet, it did change the way how most websites technically functioned. Web 2.0 refers more to an ideological and technological foundation which is required for collaborative projects to work. The collaborative functions integrated in websites is what defines Web 2.0, the technological applications make it 7 all possible. Its a platform where content no longer is created by individuals but continuously modified by all users in a collaborative fashion. Social Media The definition of social media has changed many times over the last couple of years. One definition that has been widely recognized, is from the research of Kaplan et al. Social Media is a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations 8 of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of User Generated Content. Social Networking Service Social networking sites are applications that enable users to connect by creating personal information profiles, inviting friends and colleagues to have access to those profiles, and sending e-mails and instant messages between each other. These personal profiles can include any type 9 of information, including: photos, video, audio files, and blogs. Crowdsourcing The concept of crowdsourcing is relatively unknown even though it has been around for the quite a few years now. Not much research has been done on the subject, and most of it has only examined part of the possible configurations that could be implemented. Crowdsourcing was first 10 coined by Jeff Howe calling it a new web based model that harnesses the creative solutions of a distributed network of individuals. Important aspects are the way an open call is placed to a large network of potential laborers. Understanding the effects and system of crowdsourcing can be of great benefit for non-profit organizations of Fairfood because it can offer a low-cost solution to increase awareness all around the globe with the aid of supporters who like participating in a purpose they care about. Constituency For this thesis, the definition for Fairfood will be used. It refers to the total number of people that feel involved with the organization and the cause it pursues. This includes the people that are connected through applications like Facebook or Twitter, the people that have worked here in the past, or actively support us through other means. | Petitions In The Netherlands, the right to sign petitions is secured in the constitution. However this is only relevant for petitions towards the government. The right to sign a petition towards a cause falls under the right of free speech. It acts primarily as a catalogue of people who support a certain idea, which makes it an ideal instrument for showing a collective direction in mindset. The traditional form consists of a sheet of paper with a few information fields a signee is asked to fill in. The signature is what makes the petition valid because its the most unique information an individual can share, without giving away too much private data. Still getting someone to sign for your cause can require a lot of effort. Even with an unending budget, the speed of gathering the petitions is still limited by the amount of effort volunteers can offer or handle. Especially for an
7 8

Users of the world unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media, Kaplan et al, 2010 Users of the world unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media, Kaplan et al, 2010 9 Users of the world unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media, Kaplan et al, 2010 10 http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds.html

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 16 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

organization like Fairfood, the traditional way of getting petitions is too limited to fully satisfy the needs of the lobby department. Leverage This is a term Fairfood uses to indicate the aggregate support it uses to convince the brand owners to change unsustainable practices. Leverage can consist of different kinds of support that is generated from citizens that want to show their agreement with the goals of Fairfood. In the past a large part of the leverage consisted of signed petitions and media publicity generated by organized local events. Viral Marketing Some ideas can become so popular, that everyone wants to hear or see it. Viral Marketing refers to techniques of processes where brand awareness spreads like a virus. People pass on a message because they find it particularly entertaining. They share it because they like others to see it as well. Once a message has gone viral, there is no way it can be stopped because it spreads through multiple channels and networks. NGO Non-Governmental Organization or otherwise known as a not for profit organization. An NGO is independent of the government but focuses on a societal interest. An organization like Fairfood focuses on improving the health and wellbeing of farmers internationally for example. It is not restricted by choice to a certain area, or specific trade. Income is only generated through donations or grants. An NGO has not a profit seeking organization.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 17 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

4. INTERNAL ANALYSES
Fairfood has already ventured in the online world and depends heavily on it. In this section the strategy of 2010-2011 will be discussed. However, much has changed after the documents that were used were released. The situation described in this section therefore might not accurately reflect the situation as it now is. Still, it provides a decent basis for the rest of the research.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 18 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

4.1 Developments in the communication strategy

This chapter will focus on the communication strategy that was used by Fairfood in the past few years. It will show the general goal that Fairfood as an organization is pursuing. More importantly it will show how the communication department has a key role in achieving this goal. Petitions were an invaluable tool for Fairfood. One of Fairfoods main goals is influencing brand owners into increasing the level of sustainability of their products. Without public support from 11 citizens, influencing brand owners is almost impossible. Companies value the opinions of citizens, because they are asked for their vote from within a social point of view, according to their responsibility as a citizen. For the years 2005 till 2010, Fairfood has set up a policy regarding the obtainment of petitions. The target at the end of 2010 is set at 60000 petitions. The total of 2009 stands at 45012 petitions. Adding the results of the first half of 2010 makes that a total of 50755. The total number of petitions required by the financier has been adjusted. The new goal has been turned into a more online oriented approach which excludes the petitions entirely. At the end of 2010 it was decided that petitions would no longer be the primary source of leverage. Petitions were no longer sufficient for the needs of a large organization like Fairfood International. One downside of using petitions is that its really hard to keep the support from a signee for the long term. Its hard to contact supporters and the only way to contact them is when supporters give their email address. With the rise of the new tools on the internet, it would seem like the logical next step for an organization that is constantly growing strong. People have a bond with the cause that Fairfood fights for. Therefore in order to help the supporters help Fairfood reach their goal, there need to be other means to show their support as leverage for the short term, as well as the long term. All gathered petitions which have been collected will be stored and put to use in the coming campaigns. At the moment no specific goal has been set yet, however, 21.214 petitions were gathered specifically for improving the sustainability of soy production. In 2009 a decision has been made to group all petitions for a more general purpose in line with the purpose people agreed to sign for.

4.2 Mission
The main objective of Fairfood is to increase the level of sustainability of food and beverage products. To achieve this, Fairfood applies an integrated strategy in which brand owners are the primary target group to influence. Fairfoods advocacy work aims to ensure that food and beverage brand owners understand the crucial role they play in addressing sustainability concerns relating to their products and explain the responsibility they need to take for the impacts of their global production and trade practices. Fairfood recognizes the significance of all 30 articles enshrined in the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR) and believes that, although nation states are the main bearer of human rights obligations, the declaration refers to every individual and every organ of society, which includes companies as vital organs of our modern society. The UN Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR) and its reference to the UN Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Enterprises with regard to Human Rights, defines the right balance in distinguishing between the obligations of states and companies, as well as stating clearly and succinctly highlight what the international community
11

Fairfood Interactive 0.9.doc

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 19 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

expects of businesses with regards to human rights. The norms note that transnational corporations and other business enterprises have the capacity to foster economic wellbeing, development, technological improvement and wealth, as well as the capacity to cause harmful impacts on the human rights and lives of individuals, as a result of their core business practices and operations.

4.3 Vision
By the year 2020 Fairfood International will be the leading international lobby and campaign organization that is working on a global level to ensure the sustainability of food and beverage products. The goal is to have 10.000 food and beverage companies confronted and influencing them to engage sustainable practices. These practices will in turn contribute to alleviating poverty and hunger. In addition, Fairfood expects to be actively engaged and recognized by every international food and beverage brand owner and to build genuine partnerships with other NGOs based on complementarities and genuine respect, while continuing to grow its citizen support worldwide. Indicators proving Fairfoods success towards this vision include: 1. Fairfood is well-known in every boardroom of at least every national food and beverage brand owner, and in many boardrooms of international brand owners as well. 2. Fairfood is genuinely respected by brand owners as well as other NGOs, and is strongly supported by citizens from various countries around the world. 3. Fairfood is acknowledged by many governments around the world and will have influenced their policies. 4. Consumers buying behavior is influenced to a great extent by Fairfood in several countries. 12 5. Measured increase in Fairfoods brand recognition The office in Amsterdam will remain the main base of most employees. In order to achieve international support, all of the efforts of the communication department will have an international focus and incorporates the uses of online tools to achieve interest.

4.4 Online Strategy

The communications department is responsible for two tasks: Assisting the advocacy department communicating to the brand owners Changing the terms of debate concerning sustainability Project Website The website is the primary portal where Fairfood shares information to consumers and brand owners about sustainability. It is designed to keep those who are interested informed about the newest developments on the organization, new campaigns, and sustainability practices of other organizations. It also offers various opportunities for people to help Fairfood with features such as a donate button on top. On the front page there are direct feeds from various social networks where Fairfood communicates with the supporters. E-campaigning The e-campaigning project enables Fairfood to inform and to activate the public in their roles as a consumer or stakeholder. Through e-campaigning Fairfood utilizes all kinds of online media to connect to different target groups and networks. These channels are used to change the terms of debate that relate to Fairfoods objective and to create awareness about the issues that exist in the world of food production. The other goal of the e-campaigning project is to activate the public
12

Long Range Plan 2011-2013

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 20 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

and use their opinions as leverage to pressure brand owners who are not yet convinced of increasing the level of sustainability in the production of its products. Increasing constituency The total number of individuals that support the goals and work of Fairfood International is defined as the constituency. Primarily Facebook is used at the moment to communicate and expand the constituency, but other tools are used increasingly often in addition. In order to grade the level of involvement of the constituency, Fairfood uses a pyramid to determine whether an individual is an active or a more passive supporter. The involvement can range from informal and not really engaged to formal and highly engaged with Fairfoods cause. This pyramid is visualized in the diagram below:

Active supporters I Act

Fans I Like

Figuur 1: Pyramid of Involvement The people who are most actively engaged with the Fairfoods cause and who dedicate their time to projects are found at the top of the pyramid. These can be people who are highly interactive through the Facebook page or working inside the organization to help out with campaigns. The people with low engagement and involvement with Fairfoods cause are located at the bottom. They do like what Fairfood is doing, but prefer to receive updates about the progress or the issues that it raises. Further differentiation proves to be quite difficult, especially when dealing with large quantity of supporters. On a strategic level this is even more complicated since there doesnt seem to be a tool or service that could help determine and organize the supporters that are spread over multiple channels and possibly using multiple identities. At the moment, people who are between the two extremes are the ones whove actively supported Fairfood at least once. People switch from a more active stance to a more passive one all the time, but this happens the other way around as well. A former employee for example could be an active supporter when he worked at Fairfood, but once he switched to another job, the active support changed to a more passive role in the fight for sustainability.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 21 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Objective To grow its constituency, Fairfood mainly focuses on gaining online supporters. The overall objective of building an online constituency is to: 1. Get and keep people involved in any level 2. Convert them upwards to an increased level of participation and thus create a larger constituency for Fairfood. Method To get people involved - The first step to get people involved in the lowest level of the pyramid is to create tools, distribute relevant content, set up campaigns and actions to engage with the audience and make it interesting for them to join Fairfoods constituency. To keep people involved - In order to maintain this large group of followers and to convert them upwards, a content plan will lay out what content to communicate with the audience. This involves: - Talking about what Fairfood is working on and has achieved - Interacting with the audience and establish a dialogue with them - Constant flow of information to ensure the constituency will keep visiting our page To convert people upwards - Create an environment for people so they can actively support Fairfood - Use crowdsourcing to get part of the constituency to actively participate in Fairfoods 13 campaigns in order to make them more involved with Fairfoods cause.

4.5 Target Groups

Because Fairfood is an international organization, the online connectivity provides access to all sustainable-minded people around the world. Regardless of different cultures, Fairfood targets citizens who are connected with one or multiple social network services and share a certain set of values who agree that unfair trade practices should not exist. Leverage Basic In order to create a climate in which Fairfoods advocacy towards the food industry will have greater impact, Fairfood participates actively in the public debate with the online community through Facebook and is able to mobilize its constituency. To further increase its foundation for advocacy, online communications are utilized for direct B2B communication as well. Active When specific brand owners dont respond sufficiently to Fairfoods advocacy, active leverage will be employed as extra support towards a specific company with tools like Facebook and Twitter. The focus on specific brands allows the constituency to capitalize on the fear of reputation damage, which is consistently a significant concern for brand owners in general. Citizens rallying on Facebook are the most important intermediary target group for Fairfood Citizens Several ways in which citizens can fight for a common cause are by signing petitions, making collaborative calls, forming community groups and issuing joint statements. Citizens rallying against any brand product believed to be unsustainable can generate negative (media) attention for the brand owners of such a product. Citizens are more cost-effective to mobilize than consumers because campaigning against unsustainable practices is much easier than changing consumers shopping behavior.
13

Constituency Policy 1.0

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 22 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Partnerships with organizations In order to improve the quality of work, scale up, expand the advocacy work or gain access to funding, Fairfood partners with other organizations, institutions, agencies, local authorities or business that have shared goals, as well as common values and principles with it. Such partners may include ones that work on sustainability and related issues in case of implementation of projects or knowledge exchange on local or global sustainability issues; or ones that have capacity to increase Fairfoods chances of access to funding or in-kind sponsoring for its advocacy work. In the next three years, Fairfood will actively invest in partnerships and business development with such organizations following defined points of cooperation and clear action plans.

4.6 How does Fairfood gather online support?

Fairfood gathers support primarily through online channels. The offline campaigns and stunts were excluded from the strategy mostly because of the transition into an international company. Offline campaigns would only be targeted at Dutch people mostly as the head office is based in Amsterdam, while only smaller offices are available abroad. Projects aimed at getting support and attention through internet channels have become more popular and are now the primary focus of the organization with good reason. Because of the focus on international communication, the decision was made in 2010 to make use of online communication to reach out to supporters. All campaigns will now be primarily based online with a dedicated website, or integration with the main Fairfood Facebook fan page. Most communication is done through the social network services Facebook, Twitter and Linkedin. These social media are invaluable to Fairfood since they make it possible to interact directly all over the world, and gather support without physically having a presence in the form of a stunt or a front office in countries abroad.

4.7 Summary
One of the biggest changes in the communication strategy of Fairfood is how it approaches support. Petitions have always been a valuable source of leverage. Unfortunately the problem is that petitions are becoming harder to obtain. It is hard to keep the signees support for the long term and the only way its possible to contact them is when they choose to include their email address. Fairfoods aim is to increase the level of sustainability of food and beverage products. Brand owners need to understand the crucial role they play, and what kind of impact they have on the global production and trade practices. Fairfood recognizes the important part organizations play in the international community and reminds them about the harmful effects of that impact, which might possibly be avoided. In 2020 the organizations goal is to be the leading international lobby and campaign organization. And to be recognized by every international food and beverage brand owner. The communications department has the important role of communicating with the brand owners and with people who care about the goals Fairfood is pursuing. Two important projects are concerned with the online communication. One is focused on maintaining and improving on the website of the organization. The other project is focused on the communication with the supporters through online media as well as creating awareness about the issues that exist in the world of food production. Its the opinions of the public that need to be activated, since they form an important part of the leverage that is required to pressure brand owners who are not convinced of sustainability in the production of its products.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 23 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

A pyramid system is used to order the engaged people in terms of dedication and support. At the bottom of the pyramid is the largest group of supporters who are interested in the organization, but have a low involvement in campaigns and prefer just to be updated about the progress. On top of the pyramid are the most dedicated supporters, who participate in campaigns or are highly interactive on the Facebook page. Regardless of their dedication, all supporters need to be kept involved and informed. People who are not that involved with the organization are actively engaged so they might be converted upwards in the pyramid and be more involved. Citizens are one of the main target groups because they can be used as leverage to convince brand owners. They are encourage rally out for themselves against unsustainable brands, but are often invited to participate in campaigns as well. The other target group organizations or institutions with shared goals. They provide the opportunity for partnerships which increase the chances for funding or access to in-kind sponsoring. To enlarge the total group of supporters and increase the support they give, Fairfood utilizes online channels. Campaigns often have a dedicated website and additional promotion through the general Fairfood Facebook page and twitter account.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 24 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

5. EXTERNAL ANALYSIS
This section will look at some result that were found after the launch of a survey on Facebook. These results were different than expected and influence the future of how these surveys should be taken. Two interviews have been taken with Bob Overbeeke of Oxfam Novib, and Elroy Bos of Greenpeace. The projects they worked on resemble the campaigns Fairfood launches. The difficulties they encountered match the ones Fairfood acknowledges. Reflection on the ideas and experience of these men have given insight on how to engage with people online and how to encourage them to support the organization.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 25 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

5.1 Survey
In order to get an indication of preferences and interests of Fairfoods Facebook fans, a survey was launched in February 2012. The survey comprised of 15 questions which were developed for the purposes of this research project as well as other projects at Fairfood. The numbers of Facebook fans have greatly increased since the start of this research project, which makes the information which the survey could provide even more interesting. The numbers of questions were deliberately low, which lowers the barriers for participation. The first two questions, as well as the tenth, focused on the usage of social media sites and the way people use the media for their own goals. Various social networking sites were included which have a low user count in most western countries where Facebook still dominates. But even in Europe some smaller networking sites still persevere and manage to stay on top. For example in China, RenRen is a social network site which is only accessible for Chinese speaking people, but has nothing special to offer for English speaking people. Fairfood primary network resides on Facebook, and these questions could give some information as to which other networks could be interesting for future purposes, and perhaps include them in future campaigns. Later in the survey a question is directed at which other networks people want Fairfood to be present. This can give an indication where current trends for broadcasting are or where an effective fan base could be created in addition to the current three. The third and fourth questions were targeted at getting a certain sense of activity on social media. Some people like to broadcast as lot of information to other people. Exactly this group of broadcasters is important for Fairfood, since they are the ones that will probably broadcast information coming from Fairfood directly to their own peers who do not have a connection with Fairfood. The fifth and sixth questions were designed to see if there would be people that would sign the survey without being a member of Fairfoods page on Facebook. This would give a certain indication of the reach of broadcasting requests through Facebook. By requesting what peoples motivations were for becoming a fan of Fairfoods page, important strategic knowledge can be attained about which channels are effective. Perhaps it can give a clue as to how people can be convinced effectively about Fairfoods goals. Whether its because of mouth-to-mouth communication or perhaps it could be because of goals of their own interest. Question seven trough nine were targeted at getting to know the interests of the participants, and perhaps get information about the subjects where Fairfood could improve or perhaps expand. There is a lot of knowledge about sustainability and fairness within Fairfood. But the optimal means to provide that information is the hardest part. Social media are often a means to an end, which can change during its life. Many companies adjust their applications and tools to meet the needs of their users. This is why these questions can be valuable for Fairfood since new developments arent necessarily apparent in the beginning. This is also why questions ten and eleven are added, to see which applications or websites Fairfood could use to expand. Finally the last questions are aimed at specific interests about certain topics, and the willingness to interact and participate more with Fairfood. Participation is crucial in the world of social media, and as such crucial for building relationships with Fairfoods fans and achieving success with campaigns.

5.2 Analysis
The response was quite low compared to the number of Facebook fans Fairfood has. In the end the number of people that responded came down to 37. This makes it difficult to get useful information from this survey. The low response does not make this survey representative, and it will be treated as such. Nonetheless, some insights can be extracted. For example, the people that participated in the survey, are at the very least a group of users that are inclined to

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 26 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

participate in activities organized by Fairfood, even for things that are relatively unexciting such as a survey. Each question will be briefly reviewed after which a general conclusion will follow. 1. How often do you visit each of the following social media sites? Facebook, Twitter and Google+ came out on top. Flickr, MySpace, Hyves, Netlog, Last.FM, Reddit, eHow, Tumblr, Delicious and Slashdot were used very little. Hi5, Skyrock, Tuenti and RenRen were not used at all. The social media sites that were used are mostly used by English speaking people. And since the survey is in English, it does not come as a surprise that the non-English social media sites were not known by the small group of users that replied. 2. Can you estimate the total number of people that are directly connected with you on social media? The mean seems to be at around 580 people which are currently connected with the participants of the survey. Due to the low number of participants, this question will not reflect a representative image of the number of connections. 3. On average, how many hours per week do you spend on social media sites? Of all users, only 17 people visit social media less than 5 hours a week. The other half can be indicated as heavy users since they are online often. However, it is unknown how much of this time is spent while using a mobile device. 4. Please indicate which of the above mentioned social media sites you use for... Sharing Facebook and Twitter are used the most to share content with others. Other social networks were used to a much smaller extent. Participate in discussions: Twitter, Facebook and Linkedin are the main tools people use to participate in discussions. Other networks comprise of only a fraction in this survey. Keeping up to date with current events Twitter and Facebook are used primarily for keeping up to date with recent events. To socialize with others Here Facebook is the preferred social network which seems logical because it allows people to share more information about each other. To mobilize people 22 Participants use Facebook and 9 participants use Twitter to engage with other people in discussions or share information about important causes and events. Other social networks are used less often. People who use one service for sharing dont necessarily use other services, as only 9 people indicated they did. To play games: Few survey participants use social media to play games. Only Facebook is used by 5 participants, while12 people explicitly indicated they didnt use any of the websites for games. To connect with friends in other countries Facebook is used the most to connect to other people. Other SNS are not used often for this purpose. However, the participants dont regard this purpose as very important for their behavior on SNS.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 27 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

To connect with other professionals Linkedin received the most votes, which fits in the concept of the service. Other than that, Twitter is used by 6 participants. 5. Are you a friend of Fairfood Internationals fan page on Facebook? Only half of the people indicated they were a friend, and 12 people indicated they werent. The survey was shared through Facebook and a newsletter, which could mean that the people that werent friends might have participated because they read the newsletter. It is unclear whether the survey was filled in by people who are not a friend of the fan page and did not receive the newsletter as well. 6. What motivated you to become a friend of Fairfood Internationals fan page? A lot of different reasons were indicated by the participants. There is not a single reason that stands out, expect for one: They support the cause. However it could be said that while other people didnt indicate this as their reason for becoming a friend, they still support Fairfoods cause. Most answers indicate a certain disposition towards the cause which Fairfood pursues. 7. What would you like to see more on Fairfood Internationals page on Facebook? One third of the respondents didnt really indicate an interest. The people that did show interest prefer the following (in order of the most votes): information about sustainability, research, videos, discussions, polls, pictures, blogs and games. 8. Do you follow Fairfood on any other social media sites? 12 Participants follow Fairfood on Twitter, while 6 watch for updates through Linkedin. 9. If you are following Fairfood International on Twitter: What kind of tweets would you like to see more? 10 participants signed n/a on the survey. The highest interest was shown in more information about the developments on sustainability in general. Lesser Interest is shown about cooking sustainably as well as how to get involved with Fairfood. Links to media such as photos and videos were only indicated by 3 people. 10. In what ways have you engaged with Fairfood International online so far? Most people hit the like button or share information on Facebook in general. But it shows as well that most participants in this survey actually engaged with other activities which they will probably do so in the future. 11. In general, would you like to be more involved in Fairfood International's work? Only 6 participants indicated that they didnt want to be more involved. People that do want to be more involved want (in order of most votes) to help raise awareness about what Fairfood does, to participate in discussions, to take part in focus groups, to make suggestions about which companies to target, to help with the creation of campaigns, to help create content and design. 12. Which of these topics are you most interested in? The topics of high interest were mostly concerned with the sustainability of food itself, and the social, economic and environmental issues that surround unsustainable practices. 9 Participants didnt know what sustainability actually means.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 28 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Not all questions and responses were suitable for analysis, but there are still things that can be said about the results. Facebook and Twitter are definitely both very active social networks, and seem to effective tools for Fairfood. The challenge still lies in effectively engaging with the audience and getting attention. Despite the low participation, there is still an indication that some other social networks could be valuable for Fairfood to experiment with. Some website such as Reddit or Delicious, have built their own community where people share information. These communities could be used to get more people to notice Fairfood and perhaps excite them enough to look for more information about other activities that Fairfood is organizing. As it currently stands, Facebook is the platform which is suited the most for worldwide interaction. Twitter seems to be used more to keep up with new events, which is perfectly suitable for broadcasting purposes. While reflecting on the low participation in this survey, it is hard to point to a single cause. Multiple factors can influence the willingness to participate. In this day and age the design choices can lower the numbers, but surveys have never been popular. Nonetheless it should be possible to acquire greater results, but this should be initiated by the ones that need the participation the most, which in this case is Fairfood. Perhaps a survey is too old fashioned and is not an ideal way to capture the mindset of the fans of Fairfood. At least this survey showed that in this current form, it is not an effective tool. More participation could be achieved by more interaction with the fans, or perhaps less questions and a relaxing and easygoing design which invites people to participate. The people that did participate show affection with Fairfood that cannot be ignored. There should be a lot of fans of Fairfood that are willing to participate, and who need just a little bit of encouragement to join events or activities. But this is an open question that is more suited for another research project that is designed at the psychology of the Fairfood fans, and the audience an organization like Fairfood attracts. Some people responded with interesting feedback on this survey. On Facebook someone replied directly on the post about the survey with the comment that he could not recollect when he became a fan of Fairfood. Perhaps this is a vocal person speaking for a small minority. Even if this is true, there might be a large group of sleeping fans that need to be excited again for engagement with the organization and its cause. In a textbox in the survey itself, someone commented on the lack of discussion on the Facebook page. It might very well be the case that this was an unfortunate accident, but perhaps more people feel the same way. So this could be seen as an indication that there should be more discussion about topics on sustainability. Perhaps someone who is actively working on keeping the discussions alive throughout the day to keep things interesting. The responses showed that the goals Fairfood is pursuing are in line with their own, yet there are still some who responded without knowing what sustainability entails. There still seems to be some confusion as to what the purpose of Fairfood exactly is and what it isnt. What people do like is to see the progress the organization has made, as well as the research that has been done. Video is a popular media, but people mostly view the videos through other means than YouTube. The popular video platform perhaps should best be used as a hosting platform. Still it doesnt necessarily mean that further expansion of Fairfoods network through YouTube is out of the question. Following leading trends might give inspiration for contributions that might spark interest in the organization. There is a clear indication in the survey that people would like to support the organization by helping with the creation of campaigns, targeting organizations or help raise awareness. It is not clear how many want to help Fairfood, but it is important that the few, who have even the slightest interest, be encouraged to do whatever they can to help achieve Fairfoods goals.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 29 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

5.3 Social media usage of other non-profits

Case study: Greenpeace
Contact person: Elroy Bos Head of press and communications Greenpeace was involved in a long process of lobbying and campaigning with or against organizations concerning the deforestation in Indonesia. One important participant in the deforestation is Sinar Mas, which is comprised of two parts: one is paper pulp, the other is palm oil. Greenpeace has been analyzing the company on location. This showed the company didnt follow government regulations as well as it should. On top of that, the company didnt respond well to invitations by Greenpeace for meetings about the deforestation. Greenpeace thereafter made a list of all buyers of Sinar Mas palm oil, and went to talk to them. The result was an international platform for sustainable palm oil. Even though progress was made, the real change towards sustainable-only palm oil would take too long according to Greenpeace. To speed the process up, Greenpeace wanted to influence the company Sinar Mas indirectly by targeting the buyers first. Unilever was the first company in the list to be targeted. Luckily they quickly agreed to stop buying unsustainable palm oil. The next target was Nestl, because they werent changing direction as quickly as Unilever. But also because they are a large buyer of palm oil and a well-known company that appeals to a large group of people. Greenpeace thought it might be time to launch a new campaign to alert the public about Nestls disinterest and to point them out on their misconduct. This in turn would encourage consumers to put pressure on Nestl. The risk theyre facing is putting damage to the companys image, loss of customers and/or investors.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 30 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Case Study: Oxfam Novib

Contact person: Bob Overbeeke, Interactive campaigner and runs the innovation lab at Oxfam Novib. Bob is constantly looking for new techniques and applications that support all departments. All efforts are being focused upon transforming Oxfam into a platform organization. To be more of a virtual platform for the public that want to support Oxfams main goals and to organize and carry out activities themselves. The Groene Sint Campaign Back in 2009 Oxfam started the Groene Sint campaign which targeted all the supermarket chains in the Netherlands. The purpose of the campaign was to inform the public about the current unsustainable situation of chocolate letters in supermarkets and to promote change in this segment of the market. Even though the cocoa market is much larger than chocolate letters, they were chosen to give the public a goal which was both concrete and achievable. This is one of the main strategies of Oxfam, to fight for an achievable goal which functions as a message for the rest of the industry as well. The campaign featured an application specifically developed for this campaign to be hosted on Hyves, the biggest social network currently in the Netherlands. This application functioned as a game which encouraged people to perform a range of activities to support the campaign and the organization. Each step was accompanied by the character which is adapted from a traditional holiday in the Netherlands namely Sinterklaas. This application incorporated elements frequently used in games to reward and further encourage players along the way. Steps people could perform on the Hyves application: 1. Join the campaign 2. Create a superhero outfit 3. Inform your friends 4. Deface a shop front 5. Join a Hyves group 6. Become a volunteer 7. Come into action yourself Used social media channels: Hyves, Twitter, Flickr, Facebook, and YouTube. LinkedIn The campaign returned in 2010 to report the results of the campaign from 2009. Companies that changed their assortments to more sustainable products where thanked and placed in the spotlight, to show them that the change also results in respect from Oxfam, and the supporters that helped with the campaign. This was also part of the plan to tell a more complete story about unsustainable trade and other products that are offered in the supermarkets. This way multiple campaigns could be connected with each other to show a more complete story of the goals of Oxfam.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 31 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

5.4 Crowdsourcing and Co-creation

People are getting included more and more in the design process of products or campaigns. Oxfam Novib is gradually changing into a platform organization and is moving away from the middle-man model. The problem is that there are too many connections to be made between the donor and the beneficiary. Social media is offering a way of connecting two different parties with each other. As a non-profit organization, the next step is to know the opinion of the people who support the cause, and listen to what they are saying. People have lots of ideas that they want to try out, offering solutions which could help the end goal of the campaign. In Oxfams Groene Sint campaign some people went to talk to managers of local supermarkets to convince them to only sell sustainable brands. Oxfam didnt have to send one of their own, but instead encourages supporters to send in their own ideas or tell them about their actions which promote the cause. Oxfam is also actively creating campaigns with their supporters. Favela Fabric is a co-creation company which facilitates customer participation in the development of a new project. Together with a group of supporters, Oxfam holds intensive meetings on how to develop their next campaign. This way both parties can develop a strategy which is better tuned to the interests of the supporters and gives insight on how the target should be confronted.

5.5 Communicating with supporters

One of the big advantages of getting the crowd to work together with you or organize their own actions is that a lot of pressure can be applied to corporations without investing directly into the efforts. Greenpeace and Oxfam are communicating intensively with supporters with the tools that are offered online. The big networks which can offer the possibility to build your own network of followers provide the means to offer a direct one-to-one channel with a supporter. Questions can be answered more quickly compared to a telephone call. Replying through Twitter is a matter of seconds instead of minutes, when supporters often even have to go through a menu system before being able to talk to a Greenpeace spokesman. Talking directly to the supporters can increase loyalty according to Oxfam. There is a small group of supporters who are willing to go further than the other 99% of all supporters. These are the ones who have to be encouraged to do more than they already do. They like to invest the effort already because they care about the cause.

5.6 Increasing participation and gathering petitions trough social media

Social media seems like a great tool to employ when gathering petitions. The problem Greenpeace acknowledges is that getting online support through social media channels doesnt necessarily provide the leverage required to convince companies to change their practices. The issue is that a group with 100.000 fans on Facebook could have no meaning to a company that isnt involved in social media. Getting petitions online seems to face the same problem since the whole process is much easier compared getting the actual handwritten signatures. Petitions in its classic form have become less important for Oxfam. The old way of getting a signature is becoming replaced with more creative and interactive approaches. For the Groene Sint Campaign, people could deface shop fronts with chocolate colored paint. This was part of a game which was developed specifically for this campaign. For Oxfam its about the total support they can receive instead of how much support they can get in a predetermined form. People are offered a choice, whether they want to express their support by sharing the website to their friends, or be more direct and send an email to the company immediately. In the end Oxfam will have a list of actions taken and people who supported the cause in their own way which according to Bob Overbeeke has more impact than a list of signatures. By sticking to the group of supporters with the highest commitment, youll possibly miss out on the potential supporters who arent that close to the organization yet. Giving them a range of

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 32 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

options will make it easier to join the cause, by diversifying the way supporters can help. Along with the Groene Sint encouraging them to explore other options and help even more in the game, Oxfam tries to lure the people into their online platform and turn them into dedicated supporters. The first thing they do is focus on getting a large group of supporters, after that the most dedicated supporters are being filtered out of the group. Supporters are facilitated through an activation ladder. The whole journey through the game on hyves is actively encouraged, without forcing anything on them. From time to time they will receive a message about further action they can perform. But more importantly, if they choose to be a volunteer they have multiple links which make that possible. The point is to minimize the difficulty of performing the action, and make as much use of the help thats being offered through the social media channels. The people who joined the social media groups will share articles and media more often with their friends, than those who join later on during the campaign. This can give a nice boost during the launch of a new campaign, even though it takes a lot of time and effort to amass a large supporter base. One thing that interests Elroy Bos of Greenpeace is the information that can be gotten from the petitions people sign or the activities they perform on the internet. Tools are being used to see where people come from or how much the petition is being shared with friends. The problem that concerns Greenpeace is that people submitting questions through Twitter, cant be linked easily to a person that is already present in the database. Its labor intensive to find out and link all people following Greenpeaces Twitter account to real people. However, the organization is actively researching what information can be gathered, linked and kept for future communication purposes. The issue that surrounds social media is one that has gotten a lot of media attention the past year. Mark Zuckerberg himself turned his whole user base against him in one day after setting all privacy settings in Facebook automatically to share information to everyone. People responded with anger after noticing all their pictures and messages where viewable to anyone. Since then Facebook is handling user privacy more carefully so the users wont turn against the company like they did the last time. The topic is still heavily debated and received some extra fuel after the Facebook incident. Elroy Bos thinks one of the essential parts of social media is actually giving up part of your privacy. Hes correct when looking at the persistency of data thats being stored online. Whatever you post right now, will still be viewable in five years. In addition, all data is stored in databases which are mined by companies such as Google and Facebook to use for personalized advertisements. One of the changes that Elroy is anticipating is a more refined gradation of privacy in the future, like being able to share information solely to colleagues in your network instead of everyone. Greenpeace isnt interested in using the information for monetary reasons. The thing about social media that is really effective is how it makes one-to-one relationships possible. That is the angle Elroy is searching for, to combine all the information thats available with the persons consent, and use it to develop relationships for future cooperation. The petitions are being gathered on and offline. However they are only a small part of a campaign. Gathering thousands of petitions in a short period of time can seem impressive for Greenpeace, but they always consider the matter of impact on the targeted company. Thats why they send the petitions directly to a company but more importantly, they try to keep the supporters and encourage them to participate with other activities. In the KitKat campaign, a video was created and uploaded to YouTube. To give the campaign a boost, people who had already done something for Greenpeace before and who have submitted their personal information were invited to share the video within their personal network and give positive feedback to the campaign. The petitions are developed after the proposition has been developed to be clear for the consumer. It can help sending a clear message as to what the target is and what changes

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 33 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

should be made to reach the goal. Greenpeace is also actively searching for ways just like Oxfam to get the supporters to act on behalf of themselves. One event Greenpeace organized was to get supporters to ask questions to politicians through Twitter. Effectively opening a one-to-one channel and communicating their concerns on a certain subject. So using multiple channels with support of the public can greatly increase the pressure and publicity. Petitions are being used quite often and people can grow tired of signing them. Thats why Greenpeace is constantly evaluating what media work and how to use them effectively. In the same way petitions are also constantly being reviewed as to how increase their attractiveness to the public. It has to enable the public to be creative and to be able to be influential by themselves. According to Elroy Bos the future for Greenpeace could very much be something that resembles more of an extended organization, one that shows many similarities with the kind Oxfam is turning in to right now. Greenpeace often received comments and ideas from people who signed the petition, and is now working towards an optimal integration with social media within the organization. Social media provides a way to communicate directly with the supporters and help them organize their own events and stunts and incorporate them into the whole campaign. Conditions for going viral 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Needs to be entertaining, original and surprising. Has to be urgent and about current issues. Should be shared without issue or technical complications. Customized for the mass, treating everyone as an individual. Tell a story. Show the current supporters, including celebrities or other well-known persons. show achievability of the goal, and make it manageable for the public. Keep the sender on the background of the campaign. Be present on social networks. Start with your own followers, (because of the highest viral quotient).

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 34 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

5.7 Conclusion
Getting attention from a large group of people still appears to be more difficult than it seems. A short survey was launched on the Facebook page which held 60000 followers. Of these people only 37 filled in the survey. It is probably fair to say that surveys are not the most interesting activity to pass the time, and it requires the time and effort of followers. This is perhaps a sign that a lot of people are perhaps interested in what Fairfood does, but still require more attention or more interesting ways of interaction. People indicated they want more discussion on the Facebook page, but more information and interaction in general as well. Fairfood is a complex organization and its goals and strategies are not always clear to the supporters. Simplicity might be the key to a broader audience. The flow of information and news is very fast which might be a cause of the low results. New information pops up all the time which might result in people completely missing the heads up about the survey. The only way to counter this is to have a lot of reminders and repetitions floating around. A common advertising principle. After interviewing the head of communications of Greenpeace as well as Oxfam Novib, it appears they were forced to systemize the use of social media for getting the attention of the supporters. The organizations are now transforming into platforms where supporters are invited to take action themselves. But of all the supporters, only 1% is prepared to do more than the other 99%. This 1% is the most important group of all supporters because they will not stop at signing a petition, but will ask for more ways they can help. There just needs to be a place they can voice their thoughts, communicate with others, and organize new creative means of supporting the goals of the organization. But the other 99% are not to be forgotten. They can be encouraged to join the other 1%, or perhaps do their own thing. There just needs to be a range of options they can choose from. Give them options that require less effort, but still have an impact in reaching the organizations goals. This might start with a petition, but with both organizations this is just one of many options. Petitions have become far less important, the numbers have less meaning when compared to the past. Transparency has become much less of an issue for Greenpeace. It is actually seen as a certain requirement for connecting with people. Information is stored for the long term on the internet, which is the case for the organization as well as people who use social media. This makes connecting with people easier and more interesting. What matters for an organization like Fairfood, Greenpeace and Oxfam Novib is to have a certain amount of leverage to pressure the brand owners. Social media have a lot of potential of providing this leverage, considering the amount of people who use them and gather attention with their creations. It is precisely this attention that has to be harvested and channeled through campaigns, where people can join in on and have the freedom to invest their effort and creativity. Loosening the strings of organizing and controlling a campaign can give the freedom for the supporters to have a platform where new ideas can be launched and gain attention.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 35 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6: STRATEGY
In this section the model will be discussed which will offer a solution to the problems that Fairfood international is facing. This model will provide a comprehensive system for planning a campaign and helping with transforming the communications department in case the changes will be integrated in the other processes of the organization.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 36 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.1 Using Social media effectively through crowdsourcing

Harvesting the wisdom of the crowds is one of the new developments in the online world. The concept has existed much longer. But because of the ease the internet brings to communicating over vast distances, it has become possible to outsource work to big groups of people who care enough about the cause and want to help to make a difference. Distributed networks of people have already donated much of their time to the product or service they care about. One of the most famous examples would probably be the online non-profit encyclopedia: Wikipedia. The website has already been around for ten years and boasts a larger collection of topics than any other encyclopedia could ever deliver on the classic business-model of paying people to write about certain subjects. Being completely free to use and offering reliable editing capabilities open to everyone, Wikipedia has grown to be the most comprehensive reference of almost everything that can be possibly imagined. The trick lies in the passionate community it managed to grow. More and more people keep editing the articles to improve reliability, to expand on the subject or even engage in discussions on what information should be used if theories conflict. Wikipedia isnt still around without its own share of complications, but one this can be clearly seen from this project. People donate their spare time gladly to Wikipedia, even at quality levels that match for-profit encyclopedia Brittanica. Still the question remains why do people do it? Crowdsourcing is a combination of crowd and outsourcing, which implies sending out the boring jobs to be done by developing countries as a cheap solution. But Wikipedias founder Jimmy Wales takes issue with this definition because it would mean Wikipedia is abusing the knowledge of all people to generate profit for the company itself. Another, much better suited definition was coined by Henk van Ess recently: to channel the experts desire to solve a problem and then 14 freely share the information with anyone. A more controlled way of utilizing the ideas and effort of the public is called co-creation. This is a process which is actively and intensively managed by the company to work together with a defined selection of people to realize a mutual increase in value. Crowdsourcing and co-creation are often being used incorrectly, but the key difference between those two is that crowdsourcing delegates the work to the public, whereas co-creation is an active cooperation between a company and the customers. The process becomes a dialogue and enriches both parties with the 15 knowledge and opinions of multiple perspectives. Both Greenpeace and Oxfam Novib are changing their communication efforts towards a crowdsourcing based model. The tools that were created in the last few years have made communicating with supporters and the beneficiaries much faster and efficient. Crowdsourcing is looking to be a viable strategy for fast and effective online communication. Until recently, mostly incomplete models have been created for an effective online strategy. In 2008 Sami Viitamaki developed a comprehensive crowdsourcing model which looks at different levels of the organization, as well as the people who it intends to target. This Model seems to be a comprehensive way of using the support of the people and turn them into leverage for an organization like Fairfood.

14 15

http://www.slideshare.net/searchbistro/harvesting-knowledge-how-to-crowdsource-in-2010 (07-12-10) http://www.frankwatching.com/archive/2009/12/31/de-inflatie-van-cocreatie/

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 37 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

The Flirt Model When it comes to the planning of a crowdsourcing initiative, there is only one model that tries to encompass all aspects that influence or determine the effort. The Flirt model developed by Sami Viitamaki is relatively new, but its still the most complete model to date that tries to make crowdsourcing controllable. Over the years certain changes have been made since the original publication from 2008. However, those changes have not been published yet. Still the model from the 2008 publication is a fairly comprehensive one, and gives organization a good look into how a crowdsourcing project should be developed. The five elements The Flirt Model brings forward 5 different elements: Focus, Language, Incentive, Rules and Tools. These elements allow a start-to-finish solution instead of only focusing on parts of the problem. To understand the scope of the elements I will outline the meaning in the following section.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 38 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.2 Focus

6.2.1 The constraining elements

When determining the focus of the crowdsourcing activity, six attributes are to be examined. These consist of three constraining attributes as well as three defining attributes. The constraining attributes answer three main questions: The why, who and with which organizational resources and capabilities is this endeavor to be taken. These are: Business needs Customers/Participants Organization capabilities I. Business needs When thinking of business needs, one might be tempted to think about direct revenue resulting from a crowdsourcing project. However, more indirect types of revenue can be more useful for an organization by maintaining a loyal customer base. In the non-profit world, the latter might be more interesting. Examples of business needs : Direct revenue from customers / members of the service Revenue from access to the community (rare) Revenue from access to enhanced service (e.g. more storage, more features) Revenue from letting members realize and sell their creations (e.g. printing physical books) Revenue from selling created output to other members of community Revenue from more sales of existing products to an increased customer base Direct revenue from 3rd parties (other businesses) Revenue from access to the community (partnering) Revenue from selling created output to 3rd parties (e.g. B2B clients) Revenue from selling data on member-customer base (e.g. for market research) Revenue from advertising
16

16

The Flirt Model of Crowdsourcing Blz 72

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 39 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Indirect revenue Connecting with the customer in novel ways more relevant ways Gaining experience in two way, multi-node method of connecting with customers Learning something about customers that was never known before (profiles, etc.) Involving customers in telling and sharing brand / company story Moving up in the customers trust hierarchy Increasing brand loyalty, decreasing churn Getting direct feedback in real time Accessing novel knowledge that was unavailable before Accessing novel, more effective solutions to existing problems Sharing risk from experimental activities with customers and partners Speeding up development cycle and time to market Scaling successes rapidly through involving community, word-of mouth effect Better, proven market potential of co-created services and products Lowering costs through customers self-supporting each other An organization needs to think about the audience that it wants to target, the people who you want to be working with. The why focuses on the reasons for engaging with the audience and incorporate them into the design of creation of the crowdsourcing project, and why the organization exactly requires a crowdsourcing project. This is a different marketing environment. The focus from using media to generate sales has shifted to being largely about developing and improving relationships with customers or people who are interested in the cause of the organization. This is one of the reasons why utilizing crowdsourcing is useful for the non-profit sector, because it allows you to work together with people that share the same ideology. II. Customer Participants The participants of the crowdsourcing activity should be as wide a customer base as possible. Everyone has the ability to contribute to the project. Innovators should be looked for, so new creative ideas and solutions to problems, however selecting a very wide group of participants circumvents mass confusion within the project, eases the burden of choice and improves the matching of needs with specifications and information asymmetry. Communities filled with skilled and unskilled people seem to enhance their ability to solve problems because it is interaction between the different people that operate in a diverse community that produce wisdom. The opportunity arises when issues cross different interests and 17 disciplines. Communities should ideally consist of advanced lead users as well as users with less experience in the organizations main area of expertise. Amateurs and professionals will ultimately join their forces and use their wisdom by sharing and explaining ideas. III. Organizational capabilities Managing this community and project takes a lot of work and care from the hosting organization. In the focus fase, the capabilities of handling a crowdsourcing activity should be examined so that the possibilities and constraints of the organization become clear at the beginning of the undertaking. What room is there for this kind of campaign, and does the organization have enough experience or resources for the campaign to be launched and maintained. It might very well be the case that additional people are to be hired for community care. The people are not simply machines that take over mindless jobs. The community requires a specified go-to person for issues, questions or information about the crowdsourcing project and the interests of the organization. The interaction with people outside the organization needs careful consideration of the amount of transparency the organization is willing and able to give. Collaboration means sharing assets and responsibility, relinquishing control and accepting that the participants now also co-define the brand.

17

The Flirt Model of Crowdsourcing, S. Viitamaki, Blz 36

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 40 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.2.2 The defining attributes

These attributes consist of: Scope Scale Depth After defining what the constraints are for an organization, it becomes easier to define what is actually possible for a crowdsourcing project. The scope primarily determines in which area the organization wants to use crowdsourcing, the scale refers to how the extent to which the project spreads within the organization as well as the time scale and temporal structure. Finally the depth is the final attribute of the Focus element as it determines the degree of control and access of the users. IV. Scope The central question for the scope of the crowdsourcing project is: What function is this project going to have? This is actually part of the purpose of the project, the goal that is to be achieved by utilizing a crowdsourcing approach. A lot of information can be gained by the knowledge that is given by the participants, but also by studying their behavior inside the community and towards the organization. It can be a valuable tool to find out what people are currently thinking about certain issues that surround the organizations image or goals, but more importantly people can donate time and expertise for the creation of new tools, content or spread the discussions further than traditional advertising achieves. Examples of Scope : Base level research Recognizing upcoming trends and weak signals Recognizing trends in customer behavior, marketsensing Recognizing undiscovered human resources and talent Product development ideation Funding collectively recognized opportunities Continuous existing product development Automatic real-time product enhancement Content creation Product recommendations and ratings End product design Marketing activities Advertising C2C sales Product and service support Product and service utilization guidance
18

V. Scale This specific function of the project must have a defined scale as to how much the community will have influence over this part of the organization. Its about how large the scale of a project will be, with the amount of targeted communities and the amount of activities that can be performed. The scale particularly influences the costs and capabilities of an organization. A large community would seem to offer the most benefits because of a broad audience of potential collaborators, however it should be noted that large communities have the risk for the

18

The Flirt Model of Crowdsourcing, S. Viitamaki, Blz 81

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 41 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

organization unable to divide its attention towards all participants. A small community on the other hand can have the risk of not being able to sufficiently input new ideas and solutions. One of the most important decisions is decided here. This particular attribute of the Focus element also incorporates the time scale of the project. Is the crowdsourcing project going to focus solely on a single campaign, or is this project focused towards expanding and maintaining a dedicated community? If sufficient resources are available, the long term option of building the community will reap improved benefits compared to the short term solution. VI. Depth This part focuses on the depth of the activities of the participants, and the interaction between them and the organization. In what way will the power over the design or the product be given to the participants? What will they be able to decide and how much work will it require for them? The answers to these issues will bring back the issue of the level of transparency that is required for participants to optimally cooperate with the organization. The depth of a crowdsourcing project is also influence by the time scale of the whole project, due to the size of the tasks that will be created further in the crowdsourcing process.

6.2.3. Cross-examination
After determining the defining attributes, they should be cross examined against the constraining attributes. Different perspectives will bring different ideas and solutions to the project as well as determining additional constraints. Cross-examination should be performed on all three defining attributes. Scope The scope weighed against the business needs of the organization can answer the question whether the project will be the solution it needs. The model works very well on what is called a probabilistic system. This entails a system where the required answer is enough when its good or even average. For more consistent higher quality submissions, one should investigate the incentives and rewards for participation. Cross-examination of scope: Suitable for probabilistic systems? (Customers/Participants) Answers central business needs? (Business needs) Respective resources committed and capable? (Organizational capabilities) Scale Spreading the scale of the project requires adequate investment in the amount of people working on it, as well as the time that will take. Cross-examination of the scale against the business needs will determine more accurately if the costs outweigh the benefits. Scaling the project across multiple departments isnt always a good thing. People that participate will work more efficiently when the scale is carefully defined and accessible. Cross-examination of scale: Costs versus benefits? Manageable by the people? Support for scaling across organizational borders? Is the project campaign or community oriented?

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 42 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Depth The depth of a crowdsourcing project in essence determines how much an organization depends on the information that it gets from the supporters or participants. In general, companies would like as much information to be kept private as possible. Otherwise this could give valuable information to competitors. However with careful planning, the threats brought by open collaboration would be offset by the benefits it brings. S. Viitamaki found positive results in opening up research data and problems, since people can help determining the solutions at a 19 much higher rate than in-house R&D departments One of the big risks of integrating a community in the project is that they can literally destroy an organization if there are problems in the whole design or planning of the project for example. But one of the most important aspects here is to determine the transparency of the organizations information and the communication of problems. These factors will influence a big part of the participants loyalty and engagement. Minimum amount of depth required for participants Control of information Risks and benefits of available information

19

The Flirt Model of Crowdsourcing, blz 97.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 43 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.3 Language

The term language is used very broadly in the sense that it focuses on the way the organization communicates with the users, and how it initiates the dialogue. The level of transparency is a defining aspect because the users need a certain degree of knowledge of the project to be able to help develop it. So its important to know how much information is necessary, and how this is communicated with the users. Language is furthermore the area where the cultural differences lie and what has to be done to communicate effectively with people in other countries. Additionally the project needs to be presented in such a way to the people to become interested to participate. Themes and interested need to be explored to match the interests of the organization with the interests and goals of the crowd. 6.3.1 Social Objects Recent research of the inner workings of communities shows that relationships between people 20 are mediated by social objects. These objects arent necessarily photos, videos, but can be formed around abstract objectifications as well. These social objects can be seen as a common denominator between groups of people, the object that binds their interests and creates a common ground for people to interact. Another term that is used is social glue, as these common interests act as the glue that keeps the community together. A prominent blogger called Hugh Mcleod defines these social objects as 21 the nodes that form the network around them. The stronger this glue, the greater the participation will be amongst the crowd. One interesting approach to the term social objects was written by Kyle Mathews on his blog: Social objects bind us together. The more important a social object is to us, the stronger it'll bind us to others who also hold that social object. I love Drupal and spend a good part of my time using it to build cool websites. As I meet others who also love Drupal, we immediately have a 22 strong connection through that shared social object. Drupal is a project that centers around what can essentially be defined a crowdsourcing project where everyone can join in on the development. The project harbors one of the bigger content management system communities that exist. Anyone with can help develop the project by coding

20 21

Engestrom, 2005 Sami Viitamki, The Flirt Model of Crowdsourcing, blz 93 22 http://kyle.mathews2000.com/blog/2009/02/21/what-are-social-objects

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 44 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

a new function into the project. The bond with the brand is strong enough for the people who participate, to share their love for its functionality. In this case as social object isnt defined as a photo, or a movie. But the product of the crowdsourced initiative itself has become the social object. Social objects come in all sorts of types and strength. Good social objects are complex and have lots of hooks around which to start conversations. A football game has history, statistics, personalities, rivalries, and a plot with heroes, goats, and momentum shifts. All of which provide 23 rich meat for discussion before, during and after the game. For the implementation of the social objects, Engestrom outlines a few considerations that could clear up how the social objects should be integrated: 1. You should be able to define the social object your service is built around. 2. Define your (social) verbs that your users perform on the objects. 3. How can people share the objects? 4. Turn invitations into gifts. 5. Charge the publishers, not the spectators. 6.3.2 Social Interaction People connect to social objects through interaction with each other. Within a community, social interaction can be improved when at least one or two of the following ingredients are covered: Identity Presence Relationships Conversations Grouping Reputation Sharing A selection between these ingredients should be chosen for the crowdsourcing project, since not all areas can be covered equally. Preferably, in this planning phase the ingredients should be selected that improve the project the most and helps achieve its goal. More ingredients will make the project more complex and difficult to manage. 6.3.3 Company Presence For the participants of the project, it should be clear who is running the endeavor. This means that community managers should be watching over at all time so questions can be answered. They should take care of the community and be its spokesman. People want someone to talk to who is clearly defined as someone from within the organization that can relay important messages both ways. Human level interaction is required for the organization towards its community. Equally important, the company should be fully transparent about its goals and the purpose of the crowdsourcing project. Being transparent includes being open to conversation, reacting to positive as well as negative comments. Negative feedback can be a great tool for understanding the motivations of people that refuse to participate or even bring up new ideas that can help the whole process. A clear standpoint on being open for constructive feedback will invite others to be included in the process of improving the crowdsourcing project. Admitting errors opens the door for more open en honest discussion, but it can shift the attention of the crowd towards the organization as well by acknowledging mistakes. As long as the mistakes will be addressed and communication is clear, the organization will be the first source for news.

23

http://kyle.mathews2000.com/blog/2009/02/21/what-are-social-objects

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 45 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.4 Incentives

People need to be motivated to take part of a crowdsourcing effort. When people are using social media, they often work with others in pursuit of selfish goals like status, fame, visibility or a monetary reward. However, they share information regardless of the setting, with the prospect of receiving information of equal or greater quality in return. Both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations should be explored. . 6.4.1 Intrinsic incentives Intrinsic motivations focus on the motivations someone has for contributing without receiving any external incentive. One of the reasons to contribute is about having the feeling to have made a difference on their environment. Other motivations include the opportunity to learn something valuable, or just joining in because it is just plain fun. Intrinsic motivations are the key points to draw people in to start the crowdsourcing effort Examples: Self-Efficacy Learning from doing Challenge Satisfying need for creativity Obligation Knowledge Enjoyment and fun 6.4.2 Extrinsic subjective incentives These incentives have a broader spectrum as they have an effect on the individual in relation to its environment and the people that are part of it. These are the influences of effects on the individual that come with being part of a social group and the hierarchal system that it enables. Examples: Sense of belonging to a community Togetherness and common cause Learning through reciprocity Possibility of sparring own ideas Fame through exposure Peer recognition Company recognition Authority and readership Access to exclusive resources Access to exclusive channels Gaining social capital

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 46 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.4.3 Extrinsic objective incentives Extrinsic motivations help keeping the project interesting for the long term. These can be seen as monetary rewards or a physical compensation for the efforts provided. Extrinsic objective incentives are required to justify any commercial gains for the company. Without them, people would be reluctant to give free advice or labor to a company that isnt giving anything in return. Examples: Products Services Gift cards Subscriptions Cash 6.4.4. Motivation and rewards To see how people react to rewards as a means to be motivated to participate with crowdsourcing activities, I. Borst distinguished two motives: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Intrinsic motivations drive people to participate because it is interesting in itself and derive satisfaction from the activity, while extrinsic motivations imply that people perform an activity because there is some sort of reward or compensation for their efforts. Rewards do have a great influence in the outcome, but the purpose of a crowdsourcing project must be determined before 24 any reward is included in the effort. An interesting thing occurs when rewards are added into the mix. When rewards are absent for example, negative effects on extrinsic motivation occur on performance, while the presence of rewards can have a positive effect on performance, but participation as well. This seems pretty obvious at firsthand, but an interesting development should be noted. The crucial thing about adding rewards is that the criteria of receiving any reward, determines the effectiveness it has on the participants. Reward criteria explain how contributors have to perform in order to qualify for the reward. When these are not clear, people wont know what is expected of them. This might result in a lower level of quality and participation than needed. In any case delivering a clear path to the reward, no matter what is being offered, will always improve performance. Rewards arent always the way to go, they dont always have the same desired effect. Highly intrinsically motivated people will show optimal performance when there is no reward present. On the other hand, if they are also highly extrinsically motivated, then the absence will reduce the performance because they cannot satisfy the desire for rewards. There is also a difference between financial and reputation rewards. They appear to have different interaction effects between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Giving reputation rewards has a positive influence on people who are highly intrinsically motivated. Highly extrinsically motivated people actually perform worse in the same situation. Adding rewards should be considered when the submission quality of participants is disappointing, or when a specific level of performance is desired. To improve the usefulness of the contributions, reputation rewards help boost the primarily highly intrinsically motivated people. Financial rewards have different effects on the participants. This table gives an overview of the different categories that have been determined: Crowdsourcing Type Free Sourcing Gift Sourcing
24

Size of financial reward No financial reward Small financial reward

Motivation orientation optimal performers High intrinsic low extrinsic motivation High intrinsic low or high extrinsic

The effects of motivation and rewards on performance in voluntary online activities, Borst, 2010

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 47 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Expert Sourcing Game Sourcing

Large financial reward Extreme financial reward

motivation High intrinsic high extrinsic motivation Low intrinsic high extrinsic motivation

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 48 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.5 Rules

The Rules section deals with the explicit promises of the transparency of the organization within the crowdsourcing project. The exploratory element of Language is condensed here into concrete rules for the users. Additionally Rules also deal with the requirements of entering the community. Finally it can help realize the requirement of independence of opinion amongst the participants. 6.5.1 Rules of access and initiation The participation of members in a community relies on needs and requirements of both the participant and the organization that is hosting the crowdsourcing project. The project should be available to the people that have the knowledge and experience to help figuring out the solution. But because selecting the participants is can prove quite difficult, the rules for entering the project could constrict the availability of participating by adding certain guidelines and rules. Additionally, rules for bad conduct or obstructing the process should be determined. Exclusivity can be reached as well by making certain activities or even entering the project harder to access. One important thing to note is that the process of entering a crowdsourcing project can be hampered if rules are not clear or to tedious for participants. Making them too strict can scare participants away while making them too loose can make the activities unclear, or available to people that wont necessarily help the project progress. Once people have joined the community, interaction will arise. The goal is to make the cocreation effort worthwhile and accessible to the participants. Clear guidelines will be needed for activities on how to be effective and be able to participate. Subjects to consider prior to setting up the rules: Initiation Open or closed? Screening protocols? Personal info required? Creation Quality constraints Format constraints Manufacturing constraints Arbitrary constraints Deadlines Criteria of Approval Other constraints Interaction Seeing others ideas

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 49 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Building on others ideas Remixing / mashing up 6.5.2 Intellectual property & Legal issues Working with an open network comes with the added risk of information flowing out freely out of the community. This gives competitors the ability to steal valuable information about the organization. Ideally, the only information that spreads inside the community is information that is allowed to spread out of the community. Communities will create intellectual property in co-creation. Clearly defined transfer procedures should be created, to clarify and regulate the process of transferring intellectual property, as well as the appropriate compensation. Intellectual property from other companies should be handled according to the nature of the license. Open source software can be used freely and edited by anyone who has the ability to make adjustments, but this can be used in favor of the crowdsourcing project. Examples of legal issues: IP transfer Copyright issues Responsibility releases

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 50 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.6 Tools

This section deals with all the physical and virtual locations to coordinate and manage the crowdsourcing activities. These include self-developed environments as well as already existing communities which the organization can choose to use. When using already existing communities, it has to be identified as a viable target group with an interest in the area of the services or products of the organization. It is quite common for people to join multiple communities. Thats why its important to also include the question of how people can take the planned crowdsourcing community with her into these communities. Finally S. Viitamaki advises to include the tools which convert the aggregate knowledge created by the community into meaningful action in the organization. An important question for the organization is whether the tools that will be used are to be developed or will currently existing tools be used for the project. 6.6.1 Platform People require a place to gather and co-create. This can be a physical or a virtual platform where the organization can share ideas and converse with the people outside. A clear view of the desired participants can help define the optimal location for the platform. Investigating the needs and wishes can determine an existing platform that can help boost the projects initial success. A platform could as well be designed from the ground up, but its existence should be spread effectively for the project to succeed. Utilizing an existing platform could simplify the development of the community. The ideal participant should only be a starting point since not all people will fit the description. Peoples needs changes over time as well and causes shifts in community 25 participation . This causes them to seek membership in another community or even abandon their membership in a current community. Data should therefore be portable so that it can be carried into other communities for increased visibility or extend the functionality of the project. This can be achieved through integrated chat, widgets or feeds. 6.6.2 Creation Tools are needed for the participants to create content. It should be kept in mind what content requires a higher level of knowledge about technology or media if its desired to be produced. Web tools are easy to use and easy to spread over the internet. They run inside a web browser so they arent dependent on certain operating systems. However they are largely unfit for processing and editing video streams. For more power and flexibility, a downloadable client should be preferable. This area should include the way social objects can be transported into other communities and how they integrate within the applications and tools. Short term and long term requirements

25

Blz 57

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 51 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

should be considered. Since building a community requires dedication and effort to be put in the development of the tools. Last but not least, some activities might require physical tools available for the creation of content. This can include a camera for taking pictures for example. This should be considered because the whole project depends on the abailability of these tools to the public which will determine the results. Creation tools: web tools downloadable software / client 3rd party physical tools 6.6.3 Monitoring The measurement of the influence of social media is still a subject of heavy debate amongst marketers and analysts. The benefits are often invisible and the differences are hard to correlate to specific actions. Still there are some metrics for determining social and collaborative action: Page views Feed subscriptions Comments Quality of comments Number and types of user submissions Resyndication of our content Time spent on our site Media files consumed Unique visitors Email subscribers Traffic generated for other sites Numbers of bookmarks for our content Tags associated with out content Search engine effectiveness Offline public relations impact Downloads of a piece of content/software Satisfaction levels Inquiries Improved relations with developers, analysts, media, customers Sales Cross sales 26 Reduced support costs

The same difficulty of true measurement is also true for the engagement of participants with the community and the organization. While running a community, it is important to keep track of the interactions among the participants and the organization. Some structure can be used to keep debates and questions from spiraling out of control. One example is to use a FAQ or a user guide where all the important information is stored, and updated when the situation has changed. New users can get an overview of the community, its purpose and the rules that are enforced. When issues arise over time, the community manager
26

http://www.brianoberkirch.com/2007/01/19/like-nailing-down-a-shadow-the-problem-with-social-mediameasurement/

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 52 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

should keep a close eye on the developments of that issue so that patterns can be observed in the kind of questions people ask and what the underlying motivations are. This way, future problems can be prevented, and the organization can keep people happy by supporting them and providing the opportunity to discuss issues with the project, the organization, or between members. Overall, systematic systems for analyzing data from the community and the crowdsourcing project should be implemented for automatic processing. This gives the organization a constant stream of information that can be used to optimize the project and the community. The current consensus is that while standards and practices still need to be developed further, it is crucial for the crowdsourcing project to monitor the communities activity and flag relevant contributions.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 53 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.7 Contributors
All contributions in a crowdsourced environment count as valuable input. Based on the different kinds of input, its possible to determine certain groups to differentiate in the types of actions they are known to perform. These groups are not definitive and require further study. However, with these 4 categories give an overview of the types of behavior which exist online.

Creators
The creators are the ones that contribute with original ideas, solutions or content. Their drive is mainly found in extrinsic benefits such as fame, company or peer recognition, monetary rewards, etc. What makes them excited about participating is the challenge that is being offered, or the fact that they can actually make a difference with their submission. The benefits they receive have to do with the personal critiques and ideas from the critics, getting exposure through the connectors, and receiving the collective judgment from the crowds.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 54 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Critics
The critics are people who like to voice their opinion on certain subjects they find important and are very eager to comment or criticize on this domain of their `expertise`, despite their actual authority on the subject. The potential of recognition and authority by participating is what drives them. Their motivation is more intrinsic of nature. Critics live on the ideas and content from the creators, like to receive important an relevant information on issues from connectors and enjoy the status and being recognized by the crowds.

Connectors
The connectors are the ones who are connected with, and communicate with a large number of people. In the online world this is often without knowing the other people personally. But the 27 preferred medium of choice according to Sami Viitamaki is the blog. They like to engage in conversations and they like to share the information they have received. Their goals isnt to win an argument, but find pleasure in sharing the information theyve found. Creators take enjoyment out of the sharing information with crowds and receiving feedback from them. The creators work as inspiration to write about, whereas the critics provide viewpoints and opinions which help the creators define the important topics.

Crowds
Not everyone has the time or interest to participate in the same sense as the other groups do. These people are nevertheless essential for the whole crowdsourcing project. They often stick to simple tasks like rating, voting, tagging content, etc. The combined effort turns into a vast mechanic of categorizing and positioning content. They can decide what ideas or solutions have potential for adoption and thus have a large commercial value. The creators provide the crowds with content to use and interact with, while the connectors provide them with new interesting areas or topics, or just relevant information to the topic at hand. The critics offer insight and opinions to the crowds.

27

http://www.samiviitamaki.com/?p=84

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 55 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

6.8 Conclusion
The next step in using the power of the supporters would be to integrate them in the organization without the actual necessity of employing them or forcing them into legal agreements. The Flirt Model is a model that tries to utilize the enthusiasm of the supporters and give an overview of how a campaign or communication strategy should look like if the system of crowdsourcing would be implemented. The Model is perhaps only a way to get started in the world of Crowdsourcing. The actual success depends many things, for example: on the interaction with the supporters, the methods that are used to interact with them, the social networks that are accessed, the amount of freedom the supporters have in adding their own creativity in the process, etc. This model makes the process manageable. The implementation of the Flirt Model starts when a new campaign will be designed. However, in order to actually be able to launch such an endeavor it will be necessary that there is at least a decent social foundation on which this project can launch. That is why organizations such as Greenpeace and Oxfam are changing their internal structure, because it is necessary to handle the workload. The organization has to become more agile on social media, being able to react to unforeseen events. No amount of planning can eliminate all the risks. The different kinds of people will have to be approached in different ways. It wont be the case that everyone will contribute new ideas, because some people are not interested in that. The 4 defined groups give a reflection of what kinds of supporters to expect. Enraging critics will only lead to more criticism, which will not benefit the campaign at all. The rule There is no bad advertising is not suitable in this scenario. The goal is to get people to focus on the targeted company, not the mistakes or errors of the organizer. The amount of work that can be done is all a matter of proper definition through the Flirt Model. Carefully planning what people have access to and what freedom they have with their own contribution will have an impact in its ability to go viral. The purpose of crowdsourcing is to have people create something for you, by motivating them and help achieve their own goals. This in turn can have the effect of gathering the attention of the media. It is with these effects, that the required leverage will be generated. There is no golden rule for going viral, but there are opportunities in creating your own environment where contributions of supporters might go viral.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 56 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

7. RECOMMENDATIONS
This section will give a summary of the research as well as the recommendations for Fairfood International. The advice should answer all stated questions in the problem definition.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 57 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

7.1 Recommendations
One important development in the world of communications and non-profit organizations is the concept of crowdsourcing. It offers a novel solution to a host of problems which Fairfood already has encountered or will possibly encounter in the near future. The Flirt Model offers an overview of the elements that require consideration when planning a new campaign. The Flirt model is only a part of the process, much has to be done after the planning has finished. The recommendations of Elroy Bos and Bob Overbeeke have shown that the concerns of Fairfood were indeed correct. Petitions cannot guarantee sufficient leverage in the future. Both are seeking additional ways of generating support and have successfully done so in past campaigns using crowdsourcing techniques. Several subjects have not been covered completely in this project and should be researched further in the future. One of the important things is the different kinds of people that exist online. The Flirt Model already incorporates 4 different kinds of people, but it still not very clear how these groups can effectively targeted, communicated with and rallied for the goals of Fairfood. If the situation would arise that there is an increase in interactivity between the supporters or fans and Fairfood. It would be wise to assign at least one dedicated community manager who can be the face of the organization. The manager should not let his interaction with the supporters be burdened by other responsibilities, or at least have someone to back him up. Increased interactivity with the supporters means a bigger responsibility to be there when there are problems, questions and critique. It makes the organization more transparent and more human. This is especially the case when negative information regarding Fairfood is in the media. Swift intervention would be required before the crowdsourcing initiative gets damaged by negative publicity. There are a lot of different social networks services around the world, each with a specific purpose. It is often the case that people who speak the same language flock the same social network. This could potentially serve as new bases of connecting with different countries. The difficulty is however that other languages need to be used in order to translate the messages, or interact with the community. Other networks such as Reddit possess a large community that has its own culture. These kinds of websites can often be used to generate attention to important developments. The difficulty with these networks is that the message should be as human as possible and in the benefit of everyone. This is an area that requires further research as well, since it provides a great potential of new supporters or increased publicity. All supporters that are now connected in some way with Fairfood, through Facebook, Twitter or Linkedin, they need to be encouraged to support the organization more than they already do. As noted previously, it needs to be research what different kinds of people there are and how they need to be approached. But as seen in the interviews, there needs to be a range of options where people can choose how they want to support the organization. They need to be able to choose for themselves, and be able to do extra when they feel like it. The barrier needs to be really low for participation. But that doesnt mean that people shouldnt be encouraged to protest in front of the companies offices. In the end, crowdsourcing is an extension of signing petitions. It is going a step further by letting the organization actually depend on the support of the civilians. On the other hand, the people who really care for the goals of the organization do so because they think it is an important goal for them. Crowdsourcing provides a platform for the needs, the creativity and the support of the people, so they can develop their ideas into concrete leverage. This is a situation where both sides benefit greatly. Except one party needs to lead them onto that platform.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 58 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

7.2 Summary
Till now the primary means of showing the support of the people is to let them sign a petition. This has always been an effective way of showing organizations that they need to change their practices, because the consumers care about the way the products are produced. With the expansion and the rise of popularity of the internet, new means of showing the support of the people have been created. Non-profit organizations such as Fairfood will have to adapt to these innovations so that they can be integrated in future endeavors. Other organizations already have shown promise. Interviews with Bob Overbeeke and Elroy Bos have shown that larger organizations are already preparing and experimenting with new tools and applications of social media. But however tempting it may be, it is as simple as adding new social media applications to the roster. They add new forms of responsibility and have to be integrated into the whole communication strategy. This development rests on the capabilities of building and keeping relationships with the people that support the organization. Both Oxfam Novib and Greenpeace have moved on to a crowdsourcing/co-creation strategy in the last few years. Social media applications are a way to be more connected to individuals, and help build a better relationship for the future. One important aspect is to be able to listen to what the supporters are saying. The importance of working together with the supporters has risen to a new level. Not only can they show their support through signing a petition. Through social media, the most enthusiastic supporters can help promote new campaigns. Greenpeace and Oxfam push it even further, and invite supporters to work with them to design new campaigns. Of all the fans on Facebook, perhaps only a fraction will be inclined to help. But the number of people that will help will be bigger than without the practice of crowdsourcing. It builds a stronger relationship with the people who care and can help design campaigns to persuade them to join the organization in fighting for the cause. Signing petitions is only the beginning of voicing the publics interest. But the social applications and networks which are available make it possible for organizations to extend themselves even further. The changes that organizations like Greenpeace and Oxfam have noticed by working more closely with the supporters, is that transparency is very important for clear communication. It is no longer the case that the communications department functions more like a broadcasting department where information is mostly being sent to the supporters and brand owners. In order to develop the relationships and the network that is required for co-creation, its is important to show to the supporters that they are talking to people when they are addressing Fairfood International. Other organizations often hire a dedicated community manager who directly answers questions and creates a climate for discussion and creative submissions. After connecting with people, they can be led further along the participation ladder. Survey The most valuable result might not have been received through the answers the people have given. Those answers will probably mostly provide some food for thought in the coming campaign brainstorms and discussions. Compared to the number of fans Fairfood had at the moment the survey launched, only a small group participated. Some comments that were left behind on the Facebook page showed that there are people who cant remember why they liked Fairfood on Facebook. A comment in the survey indicated that there is a need for more discussions on the Facebook page, or perhaps on other platforms. Because of the low number of respondents, the result will not be representative to what the large group of Fairfood supporters think and what they expect from the organization. From the beginning this risk was calculated, because it would not be combined with a campaign, and the promotion would be kept relatively straightforward. The people that responded showed the biggest interest in the most important aspect of the organization. They wanted more information about the developments of sustainable practices. In other words, the cause is what people care the most about. The fact that the survey is not representative is perhaps less important in this view, since the purpose of crowdsourcing is actually to ease the burden of convincing everyone how important its cause is. The effectiveness

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 59 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

of crowdsourcing actually delegates a part of this work to the supporters who care about the organization, and turns them into active advocates. This is the part where the Flirt model comes in. Crowdsourcing sounds great in theory, but its not easily implemented into the communication strategy of an organization. A model for crowdsourcing. The Flirt model that is introduced in this research project is not a complete and foolproof model that can bring success too all future campaigns. It should be seen as a guideline for designing campaigns which incorporate frequent interaction with the target audience. The communication strategy should be adapted with the Flirt model as a basis. It is a framework which incorporates many aspects that are part of the social interaction that occurs through social media. More importantly, it is a framework that covers most important aspects of a non-profit organization, and provides a way to combine them with the needs of supporters. What both Greenpeace and Oxfam have shown is that the concept of crowdsourcing means constantly evaluating and refining the interactive process. On the business side, an organization like Fairfood is constantly changing with people joining and leaving every month. The possibilities of starting projects inside the organization can be expanded further to accommodate for the needs of supporters who are not just looking for an internship or work experience. But division of crowdsourced tasks should be carefully distributed among the team members. Fairfood has already done some work with crowdsourcing experiments. With a combination of past experiences of these crowdsourcing activities and the application of the Flirt Model, Fairfood will have a more robust set of tools for future campaigns. They can provide the relationship building materials which the supporters desire, and provide the leverage that Fairfood needs to achieve their goals.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 60 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

7.3 Bibliography
Articles Kaplan et al (2010), Users of the world unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media, Paris. S. Viitamki (2008), The Flirt Model of Crowdsourcing, Helsinki. I. Borst, (2010), The effects of motivation and rewards on performance in voluntary online activities, Rotterdam. D. Boyd, (2008), Taken out of Context, California. Internet The Rise of Crowdsourcing, Jeff Howe, Geraadpleegd op februari 2011, http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds.html Difference between social media and social networking, Lons Cohen, Geraadpleegd op februari 2011, http://lonscohen.com/blog/2009/04/difference-between-social-media-and-social-networking/ Facebook Now Has 750 Million Users, Jason Kincaid, Geraadpleegd op juni 2011, http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/23/facebook-750-million-users/ Google+ Off to a Fast Start with 20 Million Visitors in 21 Days, Andrew Lipsman, Geraadpleegd op july 2011, http://blog.comscore.com/2011/07/google-plus_twenty_million_visitors.html Clicktivism is ruining leftist activism, Micah White, Geraadpleegd op december 2010, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/12/clicktivism-ruining-leftist-activism Harvesting Knowledge, Henk van Ess, Geraadpleegd op december 2010, http://www.slideshare.net/searchbistro/harvesting-knowledge-how-to-crowdsource-in-2010 De inflatie van cocreatie, Raul Lansink, Geraadpleegd op maart 2011, http://www.frankwatching.com/archive/2009/12/31/de-inflatie-van-cocreatie/ What are Social Objects?, Kyle Mathews, Geraadpleegd op maart 2011),http://kyle.mathews2000.com/blog/2009/02/21/what-are-social-objects Like Nailing Down A Shadow: The Problem with Social Media Measurement, Brian Oberkirch, Geraadpleegd op april 2011, http://www.brianoberkirch.com/2007/01/19/like-nailing-down-a-shadow-the-problem-with-socialmedia-measurement/ The FLIRT Model of Crowdsourcing: Creators, Critics, Connectors & Crowds, Sami Viitamki, Geraadpleegd op november 2011 http://www.samiviitamaki.com/?p=84 Why some social network services work and others dont Or: the case for object-centered sociality, Jyri Engestrm, Geraadpleegd op april 2011 http://www.zengestrom.com/blog/2005/04/why-some-social-network-services-work-and-othersdont-or-the-case-for-object-centered-sociality.html Fairfood Documents Fairfood Interactive 0.9.doc Long Range Plan 2011-2013 Constituency Policy 1.0

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 61 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

8. Appendix

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 62 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

8.1 Interview questions

Name: Position: Company: Campaign: General 1. How important is the role of social media within your companys overall communication strategy? 2. How many people are working on communication through social media at [company] ? 3. What methods do you use for engaging your online platforms? 4. Are there important aspects you always include in your campaigns? Campaign 5. Why did you start a campaign about [subject]. 6. What was the reason to do it now? (priority) 7. Which online applications were used in the campaign? 8. What was the reason for the visual creative direction of the campaign? 9. What was the scope of cross medial integration? 10. Did any events occur which influenced the consumers interest throughout the campaign? 11. Was the campaign a success? What was its effectiveness? 12. What would you do different if you could start over and launch again? 13. How did you measure and monitor your online/social communication channels? Is this different than you normally do? Petitions 14. What was the target for the number of petitions for this campaign? 15. Did you take specific guidelines concerning the acquisition of petitions into account? 16. Did you ever receive negative reactions regarding the use of online petitions? 17. Have you ever experienced problems using online petitions as leverage? 18. Successful other experiences with raising petitions online? 19. Which online applications contributed the most traffic towards the petition website? 20. How much additional support have you received from signees? 21. What can people do to help the cause after signing the petition? Do you have a follow-up? 22. How do you motivate people to offer support for the cause after signing the petition? 23. What tools did you use to measure online traffic on twitter, facebook, etc. 24. Are the petitions automatically transferred into a database with a specific tool or are they manually entered into a database?

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 63 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

8.2 Summary interview with Elroy Bos

Name: Elroy Bos Organization: Greenpeace International Function: Head of Press & Communications Campaign: Kitkat Background The Kitkat campaign was part of what is actually a long process of lobbying and campaigning with or against organizations concerning the deforestation in Indonesia. One important participant in the deforestation is Sinar Mas, which is comprised of two parts: one is paper pulp, the other is palm oil. Greenpeace has been analyzing the company on location. The results have shown that the company doesnt follow government regulations as well as it should. On top of that, the company didnt respond well to invitations for meetings about the deforestation. Greenpeace thereafter made a list of all buyers of Sinar Mas palm oil, and went to talk to them. The result was an international platform for sustainable palm oil. Even though progress was made, the real change to sustainable-only palm oil would take too long according to Greenpeace. To speed it up, Greenpeace wanted to influence the company Sinar Mas indirectly by targeting the buyers first. Unilever was the first company in the list to be targeted. Luckily they quickly agreed to stop buying unsustainable palm oil. In general, these kinds of propositions are offered as attractive as possible for the companies. Past experiences have shown that cooperative companies are much more committed this way. Thats why thanking companys for their efforts is now always included in campaigns. Formally or informally, Greenpeace wants to commend companies for doing good things. Showing that in a transparent world where consumers can see everything, doing good leads to appreciation and respect. Strategy The next target was Nestl, because they werent changing direction as quickly as Unilever. But also because they are a large buyer of palm oil and a well-known company that appeals to people. Greenpeace thought it might be time to launch a new campaign to alert the public about Nestls disinterest and to point them out on their misconduct. Which in turn would encourage consumers to put pressure on Nestl. The risk theyll face will be damage to the companys image, loss of customers and/or investors. The campaign itself is seen as a constant story. After the launch, it needs to be kept alive and interesting. When planning the whole campaign, anticipating the reactions of the public and especially the target is really important, so due actions can be carried out in time. Social media provide the tools to quickly respond to questions or events. When discussions arose on Facebook on Nestls fan page, it was taken down without warning. This caused an outrage among the public, which fueled the campaign, and sent everyone with question to the direction of Greenpeace. In preparation for a removal of the video, Greenpeace uploaded a copy of the video on Vimeo. Nestl ordered YouTube to take it down on legal grounds. With multiple sources, bloggers could easily embed it or download it from the campaign website. For the campaign to be a success, the goals have to be very clear as well as the whole story surrounding it. At all times its important to keep attention to current events and public opinion. After that you can think about the possible roles to give to supporters. A participation ladder-type mechanic is still under development. Right now it is provided more like a menu instead of a ladder where people climb upward equal to the level of support they give. People can then coose what suits them and ignore actions they dont care much for. The limit is drawn at participating with actions organized by Greenpeace because of legal and safety difficulties. However, material is

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 64 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

provided to organize your own rally. A difficult element is to get people to provide information for future communication. People make their own choices and look at a petition for example as an option for supporting the organization. Greenpeace still explores the possibilities of increasing the level of support. Young people tend to search for identity and experience in contrast to older generations which focus more on donations. It appears to be a myth that only young people are active on social media channels. There is still research to be done, but the numbers have indicated this. Interests do matter between age groups. Young people are more interested in creative content, while older generations like to hear the story behind the campaign. This determines how to communicate and when to respond or fuel the story. Tools Greenpeace does a lot of work on the campaign internally. Databases are used intensively and they invest in a reliable infrastructure making it possible to launch a campaign in a effectively. More complicated elements will be outsourced like commercials, feature rich campaign websites or games. When launching a campaign Greenpeace utilizes two important mechanics. Firstly they use their database to send out an email to a very large group of people. These emails contain for example the proposition of the campaign and instructions to see the video on YouTube and more. Secondly Greenpeace sends out messages trough their social media channels. The applications that they mainly use are Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. The Facebook fan page provided an accessible portal to all the media and information. The video was viewable,. But also offered simper action were possible and require much les effort such as liking, singing a petition or participate in a discussion. Reactions are constantly being monitored, as well as activity. But Elroys opinion is that the numbers dont give any useful information about the campaigns effectiveness. And that social media monitoring applications lag behind in collecting data. Supporters One problem with Facebook likes and what is appearing to be happening for online petitions also, is that the value of the quantity is meaningless to some companies. If Kitkat didnt participate at all with social media, a Facebook group with 100.000 fans might not have made an impact in the discussion. Greenpeace is now exploring alternatives to show the publics support in more creative ways. Which also helps to encourage the public to express themselves more creatively? For example: by making videos or doctoring photos and logos. Another challenge is to put offline pressure through social media. Greenpeace offers materials like stickers to send out to young people, who use them to place them in stores. But listening to other ideas is just as important as offering your own. A farmer offered his land to be used to place signs, after the government ordered Greenpeace to remove them. Social media makes it possible to have direct one to one conversations with people outside of the organization. Especially when new information is released by Greenpeace, they receive lots of questions through social networks like Hyves, Facebook and twitter. Talking to them also presents the opportunity to discuss new ideas from supporters. Giving them the option to help them in their own way also increases the loyalty towards the organization. The Kitkat campaign was only a small part in a much larger process. It gained enough support against Nestl, but lost a lot of interest after Nestl caved. What was missing for the public was the wider perspective on the situation. The support could largely been retained if the whole story was communicated clearly, like a journey.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 65 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

8.3 Summary interview with Bob Overbeeke

Name: Bob Overbeeke Organization: Oxfam Novib Function: Interactive campaigner Campaign: Kitkat Background Bob Overbeeke runs an innovation lab which develops new techniques and applications for the internet. This is part of the change that Oxfam Novib is going trough at the moment. The organization used to be more of a middle man, securing donations while working together with experts to solve problems all over the world. Oxfam now wants to be able to get the donor in contact with the beneficiary and give them easier channels to communicate with each other. The plan is to make all parts of the process of a campaign open. Let the public take a look and give their opinion about the contents of a campaign. To achieve this, they partner with a cocreation bureau which offers an existing platform to open a dialogue with Oxfams supporters. The cocoa industry has long been a target of Oxfam. If lobby trajectories dont show promise on change, campaigns are launched to use the publics support. Campaigns are never targeted at making a whole product group sustainable. Its hard for the public to understand how something complicated like that would work. Small targets are chosen. The goal to make all chocolate letters sustainable seemed reachable and could function as an example for the whole chocolate industry as well. Strategy In general every department has selected one person to work with twitter. Most people know who they are in case they need to communicate new information or answer questions. This is still being discussed on how to improve on this model, but right now every department has its own project that goes social. Online platforms are used to share information like research results. The platform is open so that other people can use them in their own way towards Oxfams goal. Several campaigns contain the idea of a superhero. It works to entitle people as superheroes when they are working towards a better world. This is inspired by a list of reasons for people to help during a campaign, to make it go viral. One of them is to give people the opportunity to grow their identity. Mass customization is used in every campaign. In this case, people could make their own superhero The supporters were encouraged to participate online by funneling them through a whole process that was laid out for them. All distractions were taken away so people could look at the instructions the campaigns mascot, de Groene Sint, would give you. But the character would also commend you or encourage you to go one step further up the participation ladder. The end goal was to motivate you to take action yourself or organize an event with friends. Even though its only a small part of the the total group of supporters, the advantage is that they come up with their own ways of taking action. It worked great in the campaign because some supermarkets caved because of the reactions from the public. The reactions become too much for the companies to handle, because then they cant just talk to a single lobbyist. All the small actions that made a difference were thanked in a video report by the groene Sint. The actions for the participation ladder were: 1. Join Oxfam Novib 2. Inform your friends 3. Deface a shop front 4. Become a volunteer 5. Come into action yourself

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 66 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

Tools Hyves, Twitter, Flickr, facebook and YouTube. The internet has become much more interesting than television. Social media are channels that offer new possibilities. Many campaigns are designed to put pressure on companies and the government. The beauty of social media is that it provides the campaign multiple channels to communicate. Its also the only way to use channels that are normally out of reach, or left alone because Oxfam is simply short of manpower. Oxfam developed a tool for the public which they could use to deface pictures of shop fronts. These were automatically tagged with keywords, which made the pictures show up on search results about the company. Petitions arent really interesting anymore if you want to make an impact. Thats why this other approach was used, so that the public could become interested in showing their support in a more creative way. The number is still important, but the signature isnt. Each action to show your support requires a different amount of effort. If a company isnt interested in social media, other channels used by supporters might provide the leverage thats needed. The threshold to participate should be as low as possible; otherwise you could miss out on potential fans of the organization. The biggest addition is always gained during campaigns, after it stops people sometimes leave to clean up their profile for example. All campaigns are monitored extensively. For the hyves page, a specialized script was developed to keep track of the activity. These logging or measuring tools are mostly used to react to events. Its no use waiting for research results about the use of twitter before you start a campaign. Supporters Oxfam make sure to always give the people the results of their actions, and thanks them as well for their effort. They want to include them more in the whole process. Getting more involved with them makes them more eager to help. Some supporters reacted negatively about the campaign. The feeling they had was that Oxfam was being too cruel to the companies. The bigger picture wasnt communicated well enough for them, which put them in a kind of bad light. But overall reactions were really positive and made all the companies change their chocolate letters into sustainable ones. Giving them a status for their efforts was inspired by gaming. In social media people almost automatically gain their status in discussions or when performing actions. But its always good to invest some time to personally thank them so you can provide a boost yourself, which happened with de groene Sint.

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 67 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

8.4 Fairfood Social Media Survey 2012

1. How often do you visit each of the following social media sites?

Never.

Several times per year.

Several times per month.

Several times per week.

Several times per day.

Facebook Google+ Linkedin Twitter Flickr Myspace Hyves Hi5 Skyrock Tuenti Netlog RenRen Last.FM Reddit eHow Tumblr Delicious Slashdot Other (please specify):

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 68 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

2. Please indicate which of the above mentioned social media sites you use for which reason (e.g., you might use Facebook to socialise, but LinkedIn to connect with other professionals).

Site: To keep up to date with current news and events To share content created by others To participate in discussions To create my own content To socialise with other people To play games To mobilise people (e.g. to sign a petition, to support a good cause) To connect with friends in other countries To connect with other professionals Other (please specify site + reason):

3. Can you estimate the total number of people that are directly connected with you on the various social networks you use (e.g., Facebook friends + Twitter followers)?

4. On average, how many hours per week do you spend on social media sites?

Less than 1 hour Between 1 and 5 hours Between 1 and 5 hours More than 10 hours

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 69 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

5. Are you a friend of Fairfood International's fan page on Facebook?

Yes, since: No

6. What motivated you to become a friend of Fairfood International's fan page on Facebook? (multiple answers possible)

The content is interesting I support the cause I like to participate in the discussion I want to learn more about sustainability in general I want to know how to eat sustainably I want to know where my food comes from My friends also like Fairfood International on Facebook Other (please specify): n/a 7. What would you like to see more of on Fairfood Internationals fan page on Facebook? (multiple answers possible)

I would like to see more research I would like to see more information on the developments in the field of sustainability I would like to see more blogs I would like to see more discussions I would like to see more polls I would like to see more games I would like to see more competitions I would like to see more videos I would like to see more pictures I don't care n/a

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 70 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

8. Do you follow Fairfood International on any other social media sites? If so, which ones? (multiple answers possible)

Twitter Linkedin Youtube

9. If you are following Fairfood International on Twitter: What kind of tweets would you like to see more often? (multiple answers possible)

I would like to see more links to infographics I would like to see more links to photo content I would like to see more links to video content I would like to see more polls I would like to see more live discussions I would like to see more information about Fairfood International I would like to see more information on the developments in the field of sustainability I would like to see more information about sustainable food/cooking I would like to see more information about ways to get involved with Fairfood International I don't care n/a

10. On which online platforms other than Facebook, Twitter, and Linkedin do you think Fairfood International should be present (e.g., different social networks, apps) - and why? Please specify:

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 71 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

11. Are you subscribed to the Fairfood International newsletter? If so, what do you think about it (e.g., the amount of information, how interesting do you find the content)? What could be improved?

12. In what ways have you engaged with Fairfood International online so far?

Hit the "like" button for one or more posts on Facebook Shared content posted by Fairfood International Participated in a discussion Signed a petition Other (please specify):

13. In general, would you like to be more involved in Fairfood International's work?

Yes, I would like to make suggestions about which companies to target Yes, I would like to help with the creation of campaigns Yes, I would like to help create content and design Yes, I would like to help raise awareness about what Fairfood International does Yes, I would like to take part in focus groups Yes, I would like to participate in discussions No, I don't want to be more involved Other (please specify):

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 72 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

14. Which of these topics are you most interested in? (multiple answers possible)

Sustainable food and beverage products Social issues Environmental issues Economic issues Specific companies Specific food sectors What sustainability is Other (please specify):

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 73 of 74

Internal document

Version 1.8

CO/Nicolas Krul

9/8/2012

Page 74 of 74