nonprofit organizations social media case study

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
J Med Internet Res
v.22(4); 2020 Apr

Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations: Multiple Case Study Design

Isabelle vedel.

1 Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

2 Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada

Jui Ramaprasad

3 Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

Liette Lapointe

Associated data.

Detailed presentation of each case.

Data collection tools.

Coding scheme.

Quotes from key informants.

Data dossier.

Nonprofit organizations have always played an important role in health promotion. Social media is widely used in health promotion efforts. However, there is a lack of evidence on how decisions regarding the use of social media are undertaken by nonprofit organizations that want to increase their impact in terms of health promotion.

The aim of this study was to understand why and how nonprofit health care organizations put forth social media strategies to achieve health promotion goals.

A multiple case study design, using in-depth interviews and a content analysis of each social media strategy, was employed to analyze the use of social media tools by six North American nonprofit organizations dedicated to cancer prevention and management.

The resulting process model demonstrates how social media strategies are enacted by nonprofit organizations to achieve health promotion goals. They put forth three types of social media strategies relative to their use of existing information and communication technologies (ICT)—replicate, transform, or innovate—each affecting the content, format, and delivery of the message differently. Organizations make sense of the social media innovation in complementarity with existing ICT.

Conclusions

For nonprofit organizations, implementing a social media strategy can help achieve health promotion goals. The process of social media strategy implementation could benefit from understanding the rationale, the opportunities, the challenges, and the potentially complementary role of existing ICT strategies.

Introduction

Nonprofit organizations have always played an important role in health promotion, such as advertising campaigns using billboards [ 1 ], radio [ 2 ], or television [ 3 ]. However, many health promotion programs run by nonprofit organizations have difficulty achieving success. This can be attributed to challenges with disseminating information to the appropriate target group, often because the target audience is not easily identifiable [ 4 ], or individuals ignoring information and not feeling engaged [ 1 ].

As a complement to more traditional information and communication technologies (ICT), social media is creating opportunities to address these challenges. Social media “encompasses a wide range of online, word-of-mouth forums” [ 5 ] and is characterized by its interactive and digital nature [ 6 ]. Nonprofit organizations are increasingly relying on social media to effectively design health promotion strategies [ 7 - 9 ] and to facilitate the reach of word of mouth [ 10 ], although some such organizations are not necessarily leveraging all the power social media can offer [ 11 ].

To date, research has mainly examined patients’ and professionals’ motives, barriers, and facilitators to the use of social media [ 12 - 15 ], as well as its impacts, both positive and negative [ 16 ]. On the one hand, social media has positive impacts for patients, such as enabling them to share experiences, seek information and opinions, engage with peers and providers, and belong to a community [ 14 , 16 - 19 ]. This, in turn, can improve patients’ sense of participation, motivation, autonomy, empowerment, perceived self-efficacy engagement in decision making, emotional support, and self-care [ 14 , 16 - 18 ]. These factors associated with social media can contribute to a positive impact on patient health: if social media enables patients to be more engaged in their health, they will change their behavior more easily [ 17 ]. However, there is also the risk of unreliable and incorrect health information provided by the community for the community [ 20 ].

What is not clear from this literature is how decisions regarding the use of social media are undertaken by nonprofit organizations that want to increase their impact in terms of health promotion. Our study, conducted in the context of cancer, aims at understanding why and how nonprofit organizations develop social media strategies, with the goal of eliciting how such organizations can successfully leverage social media. Looking at the use of social media from the organizational perspective allows us to understand the characteristics of the social media strategies that are utilized by nonprofit organizations and to identify how social media may help organizations attain their goals of health promotion. This understanding is critical in providing guidance on how such organizations can leverage social media and manipulate the factors or change the conditions of their social media use to ultimately increase their impact on health promotion.

We conducted a multiple case study to examine how six North American nonprofit cancer organizations engage in the use of social media for health promotion.

Theoretical Framework

Our study is based on the organizing vision theoretical lens [ 21 ], which leverages the concept of mindfulness. In a learning organization, there is a commitment on learning and communication. The leadership of such organizations associate learning to organizational success and to sustaining a supportive learning culture [ 22 ]. Organizational mindfulness is “a combination of ongoing scrutiny of existing expectations, continuous refinement and differentiation of expectations based on newer experiences, willingness and capability to invent new expectations that make sense of unprecedented events” [ 23 ]. Hence, although a learning organization is focused on ensuring organizational memory , the construct of mindfulness embeds, in addition, a prospective and innovative perspective. The concept of mindfulness has proven to be useful to shed light not only on the organizational adoption of ICT innovations but also to inform how organizations can chart a successful course for ICT implementations, by remaining vigilant vis-à-vis ICT evolution [ 21 , 24 - 27 ]. To the best of our knowledge, this lens has not been used to examine social media.

Mindful behaviors of organizations mean openness to new information and awareness of multiple perspectives [ 28 ]. Mindful organizations are described as those that make appropriate interpretations of their nature and needs and respond adaptively to changes in their environment [ 29 ]. Rooted in this perspective, the organizing vision is a lens that helps explain how organizations can implement ICT innovations mindfully [ 30 ]. It shows how mindful organizations can become increasingly attentive to their idiosyncrasies and environment, to make the most of their ICT investments [ 31 ]. Mindfully innovating with ICT means that the organization “attends to an IT [Information Technology] innovation with reasoning grounded in its own organizational facts and specifics” [ 30 ], whereas innovating mindlessly with ICT refers to the instance where “a firm’s actions betray an absence of such attention and grounding” [ 30 ].

Leveraging on the organizing vision lens, we adopted a theory-building approach, based on a multiple case study design [ 32 , 33 ].

The six cases in this study were selected based on a maximum variation sampling strategy [ 34 ] and focused on organizations using social media for cancer prevention and management ( Table 1 ), a major public health issue in our society [ 35 ]. A detailed description of the key characteristics of each case is provided in Multimedia Appendix 1 , including the rationale of social media use and the ICT and social media tools used.

Case characteristics and social media tools used.

Data Sources and Data Collection

We triangulated our data sources: semistructured interviews with key informants, analysis of the documentation (eg, documentation describing the organization, reports, and newsletters), and qualitative content analysis of the websites and the social media tools used (eg, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube). In each organization, we conducted semistructured interviews with the chief executive officer or the person responsible for the social media development and use (ie, the key informants) in winter 2008-2009 [ 34 ]. These respondents had a thorough knowledge of the origins, implementation, use, barriers, and enabling factors of ICT and social media usage in their respective organizations. Our interview guide ( Multimedia Appendix 2 ) was validated and refined using four pilot interviews. The interviews lasted 1 hour on average and were recorded and transcribed verbatim in their entirety. In addition, we asked our participants to provide relevant documentation. We also collected data from the social media tools across 1 calendar year (2012), to minimize biases. In the end, for each organization, we created a data dossier that provides a structured summary of the characteristics of the organization, content of the website, and social media tools ( Multimedia Appendix 2 ). The overall data collection process resulted in several hundred pages of transcripts and social media content data dossiers.

Analytic induction was deemed to provide the best analytic strategy for this study [ 34 , 36 - 38 ]. Indeed, analytic induction begins with a deductive phase [ 34 , 39 ], which allows for the use of existing theory, and is followed by an inductive phase that allows for new insights to emerge from the data. Following the data collection process, we proceeded with the first round of coding of the social media data dossier and interview transcripts. Our initial codes were deductively based on the categories derived from our organizing vision theoretical lens to understand how organizations learned to best exploit social media through comprehension, adoption, implementation, and assimilation. Next, we proceeded to a round of open coding and identified new themes (eg, actions, tools, and practices put in place). Afterward, following axial coding, codes with the same content and meaning were grouped in higher-level categories (eg, rationale for using social media tools, complementarity with existing ICT, and challenges). Finally, through selective coding, we linked the resulting categories to the main category (eg, strategies). The analysis of the documentation was used to provide additional information and to corroborate and validate the information gathered via the interviews and the social media data dossier. During the overall process of data coding, as a team, we reviewed and discussed the codification of data until we had reached a consensus; this helped eliminate any potential discrepancy. Examples of codes are provided in Multimedia Appendix 3 . N’Vivo 9 (QRS International Pty Ltd) was used to support the coding and analysis of the transcripts.

The analysis followed an iterative process, from reading the data to the data analysis multiple times. This iteration allowed a progressive theory development process with an increasing level of abstraction [ 40 ], that is, the creation of a shared understanding that forms a coherent structure, a unified whole. This was repeated until theoretical saturation (ie, the point at which additional analysis repeatedly confirmed the interpretations already made) [ 41 ]. Following this iterative analysis process, we developed our process model of social media strategies for health promotion by nonprofit organizations.

Overall Findings

Overall, the analysis allowed us to build upon the four pillars of our organizing vision theoretical lens. First, we saw how organizations need to comprehend how social media can—or cannot—apply to their needs and reality in terms of health promotion. Second, mindful ICT adoption signifies the ability “to anchor the decision in local particulars, rather than simply follow the lead and public rationales or prior adopters” [ 31 ]. Third, in implementing social media, organizations have to be sensitive to their reality and idiosyncrasies. Finally, the mindfulness challenge in assimilation is to decide how to optimally integrate social media into everyday operations to have a better impact on health promotion. We provide illustrative quotes in Multimedia Appendix 4 and examples from the data dossier in Multimedia Appendix 5 .

The cross-case analysis—of the ICT and social media tools, interviews, and documents—revealed no major variation in the results among cases based on the cancer type they were concerned with, the country the organization is based in, the nature of the social media tools the organization employed, or the organization size. Although some of the larger organizations were able to assign some nonspecialized personnel to their social media activities, these activities mainly consisted of feeding the social media platforms, not developing the social media strategy. The analysis of the data dossiers did not reveal any major differences in why and how nonprofit organizations develop social media strategies.

Comprehension

Organizations tend to have one or several of the five following rationales for the adoption of social media in health promotion:

Creating awareness: Organizations use social media tools to advertise about the disease and to promote healthy behaviors (eg, screening). Social media can be particularly useful to provide information that can be tailored to a specific audience and to reach people who are not voluntarily seeking the information (see quotes 1-3 in Multimedia Appendix 4 ).
Educating: Social media tools can provide up-to-date information on the disease (eg, risk factors) and can enable end users (patients, families, and significant others) to make better informed decisions (eg, about treatment options—see quotes 4 and 5).
Providing a forum to interact and support: Social media tools such as blogs, forums, or tweets allow users to get advice from the organization and to facilitate user interactions among themselves for support (see quotes 6-8).
Advocating: Social media tools are also, at times, used to play an activist role in relation to the organizations’ missions (see quotes 9 and 10).
Raising funds: Social media could be a way to facilitate communications and connections with donors (see quotes 11-13). Organizations may also track and report on social media metrics (eg, number of tweets and retweets), for the purposes of board and donor accountability.

In addition, six important opportunities associated with the use of the social media tools were identified:

Ease-of-use: Social media tools are perceived to be easy to use and provide the opportunity to easily reach a large number of individuals, as evidenced by the number of fans, followers, posts, and blogs (see quote 14 and Multimedia Appendix 5 ).
Low cost: Social media is seen as a low-cost tool compared with traditional marketing tools. For small organizations with limited budgets, such low-cost tools provide new opportunities to communicate and provide information (see quotes 15 and 16).
Interactivity with end users: Social media provides a forum for individuals to connect with each other and to engage in more personalized discussions in a timely manner (see quotes 17 and 18). Data show active participation of users ( Multimedia Appendix 5 ) and better effectiveness. For example, end users can follow links and choose the path of information that they would like to explore deeper (see quotes 19 and 20).
Flexibility: Social media tools do not impose a strict structure on how the tools are used, how individuals choose to interact and access information using these tools, and how they are integrated with other media (see quotes 21 and 22). This was further evidenced by the links for YouTube videos that were found on many Facebook pages ( Multimedia Appendix 5 ).
Status: The use of social media tools was associated with a desire for status differentiation and perceptions of popularity, trendiness, reputation, efficiency, etc (see quotes 23 and 24).
Virability: Social media’s increased ease in spreading information compared with more traditional ICT—what we call virability—was evidenced by the ability to repost information on Facebook and Twitter ( Multimedia Appendix 5 ), sometimes through mobile devices (see quotes 25 and 26).

To maximize the impact, all six organizations used social media tools in addition to some ICT tools (eg, webpages and electronic newsletters) and even more traditional communication tools (eg, posters, magazine, and television advertisements; see quotes 27, 28, and 29 and Multimedia Appendix 5 ). They saw social media as a way to add to what they were already doing, to give more strength to their activities, and to augment and expand the capabilities of the ICT tools (see quotes 30-32). Concretely, analysis revealed three specific social media strategies :

Replicate: Organizations essentially imitate their existing use of ICTs, but through a different channel to reach a different and broader audience (see quotes 33 and 34).
Transform: Organizations use social media for the same purpose as it uses ICT tools, but the message is transformed in the way it is formatted and delivered, to better engage end users (see quotes 35 and 36).
Innovate: To truly tap in the soul of social media, organizations modify the message or action for a new purpose, seeking different results. Such a strategy entails, for example, reposting a message, taking advantage of the virability of the media, and using blogs for press conferences or virtual billboards for advertising. Altogether such a strategy may ultimately enable the development of a community (see quotes 37 and 38).

Implementation

To better take into account the reality of their usage and context, organizations have had to deal with several challenges :

Lack of control: Managing the openness in communication that is enabled through social media ( Multimedia Appendix 5 ) and appropriately monitor the quality, quantity, and format of conversations individuals were having (see quotes 39 and 40). This difficulty concerns both the user contribution and the information that the organization and partners themselves provided (see quotes 41 and 42).
Technology-related issues: Although user friendly, technology usage introduces challenges such as forced upon updates and characteristics that create limitations (see quotes 43 and 44).
Diversity of audience: Reaching a wider audience creates challenges in tailoring the message to different communities (eg, an older population and less educated individuals; see quotes 45 and 46 and Multimedia Appendix 5 ).
Availability of resources: Finding the resources to develop and manage social media was considered challenging, given the need to find individuals with the expertise in both the content (cancer) and the social media tool. Moreover, there is a need to maintain a social media presence at a high level of interactivity, which requires an extensive amount of time (see quotes 47-50).
Difficulty in measuring impacts: It is difficult to define relevant indicators of success and objectively assess whether social media use truly helps meet goals (see quotes 51 and 52).

Assimilation

In assimilation, organizations decide how to optimally integrate the new social media tools into everyday operations.

Mindless/mindful: At the onset, organizations did not necessarily adopt or use social media in a well thought-out manner, with clear objectives in mind. Actually, the initial use of social media in most of the organizations was primarily mindless. This was particularly noticeable in the case of two organizations where the decision to use social media was not a planned event and where social media strategies were enacted to seize emergent opportunities (see quotes 53 and 54). The level of mindfulness of social media use by the organizations we studied evolved. With time, some organizations were beginning to reflect more about social media (see quotes 55 and 56). Interestingly, in the organization that was most mindful at the onset, social media usage continued to evolve in the same manner, maintaining a mindful stance (see quote 57).
Reactive/proactive: Above and beyond the mindful/mindless stance of the process, our results show that the social media strategies were at times enacted in a reactive manner and at other times in a proactive manner. Social media strategies were initially implemented mainly in a reactive manner (ie, in response to users’ explicit needs; see quote 58). Only one organization exhibited goal-directed behavior and demonstrated anticipation—a proactive orientation—that is, enabling change before such needs are overtly expressed (see quote 59).

Connecting the Dots

In summary, our data revealed that in addition to considering the level of mindfulness, it was important to consider the proactiveness, or lack thereof, exhibited by the organizations. We linked the strategies put forth by organizations to their overall level of mindfulness and proactive orientation ( Figure 1 ).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is jmir_v22i4e15586_fig1.jpg

Mindfulness and proactive orientation of the six cases. BCA: Breast Cancer Action; BCF: Breast Cancer Foundation; PCF: Prostate Cancer Foundation; PFP: Pints for Prostate; UsT: Us Too International.

We identified three clusters:

Cluster 1: The organization exhibits a low level of mindfulness and little proactiveness. The only strategy that was mobilized is this case was replicate. Hence, this organization mostly used social media to carry on the same activities but using social media (see quotes 60-62).
Cluster 2: One organization exhibited a fairly low level of mindfulness but a high proactive orientation; another organization exhibited a low proactive orientation but a higher level of mindfulness. In both cases, these organizations leverage social media to transform their message, using the particularities of social media to better engage users (see quotes 63 and 64). Despite the fact that these organizations are not both proactive and mindful, they do appear to derive higher value from their social media strategies in terms of health promotion (see quotes 65 and 66) than organizations exhibiting a low level of mindfulness and little proactiveness (ie, cluster 1).
Cluster 3: Organizations exhibit a higher level of mindfulness compared with the other clusters. In all, three organizations did not use social media simply to replicate or to transform their message but most importantly to innovate by leveraging the potential offered by social media (see quote 67 and 68). Not surprisingly, these organizations appear to derive the most value from their involvement in social media (see quotes 69 and 70).

The Process Model of Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations

On the basis of our data analysis and the organizing vision theoretical lens, we developed a process model that reveals the elements and patterns of relationships that underlie the enactment of social media strategies by organizations for health promotion ( Figure 2 ).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is jmir_v22i4e15586_fig2.jpg

Process model of social media strategies for health promotion by nonprofit organizations.

It first shows that the four pillars of social media strategy enactment— comprehension , adoption , implementation , and assimilation —are not necessarily observed sequentially. Instead, they are intertwined, can occur in any order, and are often iterative. As such, assimilation can occur anywhere in the social media enactment process.

Our model also shows that the organizations need to comprehend the rationales and opportunities linked with social media tools. They develop their social media strategies (replicate, transform, innovate) based on the complementarities they seek between existing ICT and social media, which will affect the content, the format, and the delivery of the message ( Table 2 ). Our model also shows that to leverage their social media strategies , organizations also need to balance opportunities with the inherent challenges of social media.

Social media strategies: key message characteristics in the synergistic use of information and communication technologies and social media tools.

This social media enactment process is also embedded in the orientation— proactive vs reactive —and the level of mindfulness vs mindlessness in which social media strategies are put in place, as illustrated in Table 3 .

Reactive/proactive and mindless/mindful social media strategies enactment.

When organizations are mindless and reactive (type 1), they generally go with the flow , that is, they observe and follow what is happening in the field. When organizations are more proactive, although still mindless (type 2), they do not have a clear plan for their social media strategy. Regardless, they attempt to stay in the forefront of their social media use and iteratively adjust their subsequent social media decisions on a trial-and-error basis. When organizations are mindful and reactive (type 3), they are observing others’ usage of social media and assessing its potential value. They then decide whether and how to engage in implementing their social media strategy, thus making an informed decision but without a clear and definite plan of action. The final category (type 4) is when organizations are self-aware, staying on the edge, and create a clearly defined strategy . They then act with foresight, in a strategic and rational manner, which occurs when organizations are proactive and mindful.

Principal Findings

Understanding how social media strategies are enacted and how social media can be strategically leveraged at the organizational level is an understudied area of research in health care. Recent work has established the importance of social media for patients and professionals to enable interactions and to access information [ 14 ]. We complement this work by looking at social media adoption by nonprofit cancer organizations—institutions that are central in health promotion. The goals of this study were to understand why and how six organizations put forth and enact social media strategies to achieve health promotion goals. Our analysis revealed five main rationales for adoption of social media, as described above, and a process of organizational adoption that we visualize in Figure 2 . A key aspect of the all the rationales identified is that they have the common goal of enabling interaction with patients, families, and members of the community for reasons ranging from creating awareness and educating individuals to raising funds for the organizations.

This study adds to the existing literature around patient and professional use of social media [ 14 , 42 ] and extends it by delving deep into the process of adoption of social media by nonprofit organizations. In doing this, we not only look at social media by itself but also its use alongside other ICT tools [ 43 ]. To the best of our knowledge, no prior work has taken this approach, which provides an overarching view of the social media adoption process by organizations, a comprehensive understanding of opportunities and challenges associated with adoption of social media, and practical implications for managers who seek to use social media.

One of our key findings in this study is that to leverage their social media strategies, organizations need to balance opportunities with the inherent challenges of social media, such as lack of control [ 44 ], risk of misinformation, lack of privacy, limited audience, usability of social media programs, and the manipulation of identity [ 17 ]. With the recent attention to the spread of misinformation on the Web, organizations must understand and implement mechanisms to combat the risks associated with misinformation and privacy. It is critical that information is disseminated from credible sources, such as the organizations that we studied, using tools and technologies that end users, such as patients and their families, can access.

Furthermore, when studying organizational social media use, the question of how organizations should communicate with stakeholders is vital [ 45 ]. Results from our study suggest that it is imperative to consider the existing ICT when adopting a social media strategy. Our results shows that depending on the complementarity sought by the concomitant use of ICT and social media [ 46 ], organizations will seek to create the optimal synergy between the two strategies when interacting with users, which is consistent with current research findings that suggest that ICT provides most value when combined with other existing resources in the organization [ 46 ]. In developing social media strategies that take this complementarity into account, organizations must consider the capabilities of the tools along three dimensions: the content, the format, and the delivery [ 47 , 48 ]. Indeed, “...strategies do not need to be drastically overhauled to incorporate social media but merely retooled in framing messages and targeting audiences using the new media” [ 49 ].

Overall, although some organizations embrace social media to be at the forefront of innovation to provide health promotion, for others, social media adoption appears to be more of a bandwagon effect. Organizations feel pressure to use social media as they see their competitors and peers using it. In making decisions about social media, organizations face a highly ambiguous environment because of its novelty. Indeed, at the organizational level, the impacts of social media strategies, and their benefits and risks, are still uncertain. Previous research indicates that under high-ambiguity conditions, bandwagon pressures tend to increase [ 28 ]. In addition, it has been said that the idea of “mindlessness in innovating with IT [Information Technologies] can reasonably be entertained whenever and wherever its likely rewards outweigh its risks” [ 30 ]. However, with time, as the understanding of social media and its role at the organizational level becomes clearer, it is to be expected that organizations would move toward enacting more mindful and proactive social media strategies. Indeed, “mindfulness is not something that an organization possesses: Instead, it is something that emerges in a process of becoming” [ 50 ]. Our results suggest that a proactive/mindful stance contributes to improve health promotion.

These results also pave the way for future research, such as testing the model using a larger sample to understand how this process may change depending on the type of organizations (eg, public health agencies, hospitals, private health care organizations, and bigger organization with dedicated staff for the social media activities). Moreover, it would be interesting to take into account the material properties of the social media tools themselves [ 51 - 53 ]. In that perspective, a study of the affordances of each social media tool could be insightful.

Our process model of social media strategies for health promotion by nonprofit organizations provides a means for managers of nonprofit organizations to understand the rationale of social media strategies and the role that social media can play in health promotion. Our process model can also be used as a guiding framework for nonprofit organizations engaging in social media use for health promotion. These organizations often face the challenge of effectively disseminating information to and engaging with the correct target group, all at low cost. This study provides these organizations with a mechanism for assessing how they can best exploit social media, taking into consideration the opportunities and challenges they face and the complementarities with their existing ICT. Using and understanding these mechanisms can help them create a well-defined strategy that will permit synergies between the existing ICT and social media, so that the use of both sets of tools together will bring in benefits that will surpass the simple sum of each.

Acknowledgments

Funding for this research was provided by a William Dawson Scholar Award (McGill University). Isabelle Vedel also received a New Investigator Salary Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The authors would like to thank Marine Hardouin and Andrea Zdyb for their help in editing this manuscript.

Abbreviations

Multimedia appendix 1, multimedia appendix 2, multimedia appendix 3, multimedia appendix 4, multimedia appendix 5.

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Social Media’s Purpose in Nonprofit Donor Engagement

March 21, 2017.

by Heather Weathers

Introduction

It’s no surprise that marketing methods have increasingly focused attention on digital marketing through social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Many nonprofit organizations have followed this pattern and attempted to integrate social media into traditional donor development models. Despite their efforts, many organizations have still seen steep declines in donor retention rates and are struggling to engage younger millennial audiences (Donor Retention, 2009).

Where does social media fit?

Donor identification and development has historically been based on donor pyramids, ladders and funnels which organize donors from least engaged (i.e. smallest donation amounts) to most engaged (major donations). Many organizations have integrated social media onto the bottom rungs of these traditional models (Dixon and Keyes, 2013). However, in 2010 Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide teamed up with Georgetown University’s Center for Social Impact Communication and found that most Americans’ first interaction with a nonprofit was not social-media driven. In fact, only 18 percent of respondents first became involved by engaging with a nonprofit organization via a social media outlet such as Facebook (Ogilvy, 2011).

These so-called “slacktivists” have been assumed to do nothing more than “like” an organization or update a profile picture for the cause but eschew more traditional methods of involvement such as volunteering time or donating money. So where does social media fit in donor development? Are nonprofit employees wasting their limited time and resources on a medium with no return on investment?

The Ogilvy/Georgetown study (2011) found that contrary to the slacktivist portrayal of an individual who “likes” a cause on Facebook but has no further engagement, their research found that Americans who engaged with a cause on social media were also most likely to participate in cause-related activities such as volunteering or donating money outside of social media. For these individuals, social media is simply being added to the list of activities that they already participate in for the cause, including giving money.

These individuals were most likely donors or volunteers first who then became more involved in the cause by promoting the organization via social media. Most individuals have no interest in engaging in conversations or relationships with large “faceless” corporations on Facebook (Vorvoreanu, 2009).

Social media is a useful tool to help existing donors and volunteers influence others for the cause. However, this has not typically been the current usage trend among nonprofit organizations (Dixon, 2013).

What’s wrong with current nonprofit social media strategies?

Social media engagement is typically seen as a low-involvement activity. In contrast, encouraging others to donate money is a high-involvement activity. It is easy to share a post or “like” a page. These low-involvement activities are appealing to nonprofit communicators because they are simple and straightforward. To simply ask followers to “share” and “like” posts does not require communicators and development departments to work across each other (Dixon, 2013). For most nonprofit communicators, low-involvement activities such as liking an organization on social media is generally seen as the first-step toward moving a donor to higher-influence activities such as asking others to donate to the organization.

However, Dixon and Keyes found that “there is a noticeable lack of activities that fall into the low involvement, high influence quadrant, because for an activity to be influential, it needs to be grounded in authenticity and personal commitment. A person can be involved but not influential, but can never be influential without being involved.”

Current social media usage trends for nonprofit organizations involve numerous low-involvement activities in an attempt to drive awareness of a cause. Most nonprofit organizations used Facebook to drive top-down communication similar to traditional media usage to drive traffic and attention to the brand. In contrast most nonprofits Facebook fans shared specific events and highlighted their own personal involvement (Das, 2010).

Most nonprofit social media campaigns focus on three types of posting: Information, Community and Action (Lovejoy and Saxton, 2012).

Information : almost 60 percent of the top 100 organizations’ tweets were providing information about the organizations’ activities or latest news.
Community : Only 25 percent of most organizations’ tweets fostered any type of dialogue or invited community building in the digital sphere. Types of community-building posts or tweets include recognition and thanks to specific people or companies, responding to public messages or acknowledging current events.
Action : About 15 percent of organization’s messages focused on getting people to do something for the organization such as donate money, buy a t-shirt or attend a fundraising event.

What do people want?

Email is most donors’ most preferred communication method – even among Millenial donors where 93 percent favored email over Facebook and print communication (Case, 2010). Most individuals use social media for three reasons: to feel connected, for entertainment and for self-affirmation (Leung, 2001).

Variable 1: Connectedness

Social networking is primarily used to stay in contact with people who are already seen frequently by the user (Lenhart and Madden, 2007).

Variable 2: Entertainment

The main motive for joining Facebook is peer pressure and the main gratifications people receive when using Facebook include entertainment and staying informed in social circles (Quan-Haase and Young, 2010). Among those over age 50, the two primary factors in Facebook usage are mood management including entertainment such as games and social action such as reposting political opinions (Ancu, 2012).

Variable 3: Self-affirmation

The “hipster” effect is the idea that the more connected someone appears to be in causes actually increases a person’s social capital (Ellison, et al., 2007). This self-affirmation theory was used to determine that spending time on Facebook fulfilled an ego need and that exposure to one’s own Facebook profile increased self-worth and self-integrity (Toma and Hancock, 2013).

How can nonprofit organizations improve their social media strategies?

Social media is constantly changing and it can be overwhelming to consider all of the options and tools available for organizations to reach their target audiences. Organizations can incorporate these elements into their social media strategy to help produce real results:

Start at the beginning. The first step in building a good social media strategy starts with a good donor strategy. Entry points for engagement into a nonprofit are not confined to a particular level. In fact, most people enter at various levels, such as both a volunteer and a social media supporter. Often people have multiple levels of engagement with an organization at one time (Ogilvy, 2011). An organization’s goal is to offer supporters a variety of involvements that engage their strengths and abilities to have an impact (Dixon and Keyes, 2013).
Involvement first. Most people who donate online, “like” an organization’s Facebook page or follow an organization through any social media were first involved in some other connection to the organization such as being a volunteer, attending meetings or in leadership (board member, committee member, etc.) (Reddick and Ponomariov, 2013). Social media outlets are an additional element similar to a newsletter, a phone call or a face-to-face meeting used to engage in meaningful conversations with people already connected to the organization.
Target the right people. It is important to prioritize where the organization’s audience spends most of their time with social media (Moravick, 2010). If they are using Twitter, then the organization should follow their accounts and tweet pictures of the individual or company in action as volunteers or sponsors of events. If the organizations’ corporate partners are using Facebook, the organization should tag them in “thank you” posts with pictures that show how their money has impacted lives. Organizations may not need to use more than two or three social media outlets to reach the largest portion of their donors and volunteers.
“You cannot manage what you don’t measure” (PR News, 2009). Look at where traffic from specific sites is coming from and where messages are going. To do this, use “tagged links” through Google Analytics or find a favorite method of tracking all social media outlets including the organization’s newsletter. After acquiring the data, organizations should ask themselves: is this traffic useful? If they are getting good data, organizations will probably rethink some of their social media outlets and strategy (PR News, 2009).
Reassess and re-evaluate. Once organizations have built a strategy, involved their constituents in meaningful communication and have the numbers to prove it, the audience’s interests will change again. Organizations should build re-evaluation methods and mobility into their strategy to allow the flexibility to change strategies at any time (Greenberg and Kates, 2014).

If social media has not revolutionized the way people get involved with nonprofit organizations, where should it fit in an organization’s strategy?

Most organizations have two social media audiences: their current supporters and their supporters’ network. There are several ways to engage these two audiences depending on the cause, the social media outlet, and the supporters themselves (Dixon and Keyes, 2013).

Current Supporters

There are typically five ways in which a social-media supporter first becomes involved with supporting causes: donating money (40 percent), talking to others about the cause (40 percent), learning more about the cause and its impact (37 percent), donating clothing or other items (30 percent), and signing a petition (27 percent) (Ogilvy, 2011).

Social media can be a meaningful conversation with people who are already engaged with an organization as a donor, volunteer or member. This strategy creates an environment of continuous communication that donors demand (Case, 2009).

Current Supporters Network

“Friend-raising” can be a powerful element to social media (Daniels, 2010). When an audience feels engaged and empowered to help a cause that they feel passionate about, they are more likely to involve their friends. Organizations can turn the role of fundraiser from a solely internal function of the organization to a role that’s shared by everyone in his or her community by preparing social media material that is easily redistributed, straightforward and directly shares the impact of the cause such as stories of those who need help or have been helped by the organization (Saxton and Wang, 2014).

Nearly three-quarters of Millenials said they would tell Facebook friends about great nonprofit events, and 65 percent said they would promote a nonprofit’s great story or accomplishment. In addition, 61 percent said they would use Facebook to alert friends to volunteering opportunities and needs (Case, 2012).

Eighty-six percent of nonprofit professionals report that their organizations use social media in some form. However, most nonprofits dedicate less than the equivalent of one half of one full-time employee to overseeing social media efforts. In addition, more than 60 percent allot no extra budget dollars to such efforts (Soder, 2009).

The key is for nonprofit organizations to find their audience, begin a conversation with them and empower them to bring others into the dialogue.

Scholarly (Peer-reviewed)

Ancu, M. (2012). Older Adults on Facebook: A Survey Examination of Motives and Use of Social Networking by People 50 and Older. Florida Communication Journal , 40(2), 1-12
Das, A. (2010). Facebook and Nonprofit Organizations: A Content Analysis. Conference Papers — International Communication Association , 1.
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 12, 1143-1168.
Leung, L.(2001).College student motives for chatting on ICQ. New Media & Society, 3, 483-500
Lovejoy, K., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer ‐ Mediated Communication, 17 (3), 337-353.
Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide, Georgetown University Center for Social Impact Communication. (2011). Dynamics of Cause Engagement. Retrieved from http://csic.georgetown.edu/research/digital-persuasion/dynamics-of-cause-engagement
Quan-Haase, A., Young, A. (2010). Uses and Gratifications of Social Media: A Comparison of Facebook and Instant Messaging. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 30: 350- 361
Reddick, C. G., & Ponomariov, B. (2013;2012;). The effect of individuals’ organization affiliation on their internet donations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42 (6), 1197-1223.
Saxton, G. D., & Wang, L. (2014). The social network effect: The determinants of giving through social media. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43 (5), 850-868.
Toma, Catalina L. & Hancock, Jeffrey T. (2013). Self Affirmation Underlies Facebook Use. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, March 2013; vol. 39, 3: pp. 321-331.,
The Case Foundation. (2015). Millenial Impact Report . Retrieved from http://fi.fudwaca.com/mi/files/2015/07/2015-MillennialImpactReport.pdf
Vorvoreanu, M. (2009). Perceptions of Corporations on Facebook: An Analysis of Facebook Social Norms. Journal Of New Communications Research , 4(1), 67-86.

Trade Publications

Case study: Metrics make the world go ’round: How one nonprofit measures the impact of its social media marketing. (2009). PR News, 65 (17)
Daniels, C. (2010, 07). Nonprofits discover power of social media fundraising. PRweek, 13 , 18.
Dixon, J., & Keyes, D. (2013, Winter). The permanent disruption of social media. Stanford Social Innovation Review,11 , 24-29.
Donor retention an issue, even as online donations rise. (2009). Nonprofit Business Advisor , (236), 5-9.
Greenberg, E., & Kates, A. (2014). Strategic digital marketing: Top digital experts share the formula for tangible returns on your marketing investment . New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lenhart, A., &Madden, M.( 2007a, July 1). Social networking websites and teens: An overview (Report). Washington, DC : Pew Internet and American Life Project . Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/ppf/r/198/report_display.asp
Moravick, A. (2010). Nonprofits look to up their social media game. Promo (Online)
Soder, C. (2009). Social media become key tool for nonprofits. Crain’s Cleveland Business, 30 (45), 5.

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 6.4.2020 in Vol 22 , No 4 (2020) : April

Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations: Multiple Case Study Design

Authors of this article:

Original Paper

Isabelle Vedel 1, 2 * , MD, PhD ;
Jui Ramaprasad 3 * , BS, PhD ;
Liette Lapointe 3 * , BA, MSc, PhD

1 Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

2 Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada

3 Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

*all authors contributed equally

Corresponding Author:

Isabelle Vedel, MD, PhD

Department of Family Medicine

McGill University

5858 Chemin de la Côte-des-Neiges, 3rd Fl

Montreal, QC, H3S 1Z1

Phone: 1 5143999107

Email: [email protected]

Background: Nonprofit organizations have always played an important role in health promotion. Social media is widely used in health promotion efforts. However, there is a lack of evidence on how decisions regarding the use of social media are undertaken by nonprofit organizations that want to increase their impact in terms of health promotion.

Objective: The aim of this study was to understand why and how nonprofit health care organizations put forth social media strategies to achieve health promotion goals.

Methods: A multiple case study design, using in-depth interviews and a content analysis of each social media strategy, was employed to analyze the use of social media tools by six North American nonprofit organizations dedicated to cancer prevention and management.

Results: The resulting process model demonstrates how social media strategies are enacted by nonprofit organizations to achieve health promotion goals. They put forth three types of social media strategies relative to their use of existing information and communication technologies (ICT)—replicate, transform, or innovate—each affecting the content, format, and delivery of the message differently. Organizations make sense of the social media innovation in complementarity with existing ICT.

Conclusions: For nonprofit organizations, implementing a social media strategy can help achieve health promotion goals. The process of social media strategy implementation could benefit from understanding the rationale, the opportunities, the challenges, and the potentially complementary role of existing ICT strategies.

Introduction

We conducted a multiple case study to examine how six North American nonprofit cancer organizations engage in the use of social media for health promotion.

Theoretical Framework

Leveraging on the organizing vision lens, we adopted a theory-building approach, based on a multiple case study design [ 32 , 33 ].

Data Sources and Data Collection

Overall Findings

Comprehension

Organizations tend to have one or several of the five following rationales for the adoption of social media in health promotion:

Creating awareness: Organizations use social media tools to advertise about the disease and to promote healthy behaviors (eg, screening). Social media can be particularly useful to provide information that can be tailored to a specific audience and to reach people who are not voluntarily seeking the information (see quotes 1-3 in Multimedia Appendix 4 ).
Educating: Social media tools can provide up-to-date information on the disease (eg, risk factors) and can enable end users (patients, families, and significant others) to make better informed decisions (eg, about treatment options—see quotes 4 and 5).
Providing a forum to interact and support: Social media tools such as blogs, forums, or tweets allow users to get advice from the organization and to facilitate user interactions among themselves for support (see quotes 6-8).
Advocating: Social media tools are also, at times, used to play an activist role in relation to the organizations’ missions (see quotes 9 and 10).
Raising funds: Social media could be a way to facilitate communications and connections with donors (see quotes 11-13). Organizations may also track and report on social media metrics (eg, number of tweets and retweets), for the purposes of board and donor accountability.

In addition, six important opportunities associated with the use of the social media tools were identified:

Ease-of-use: Social media tools are perceived to be easy to use and provide the opportunity to easily reach a large number of individuals, as evidenced by the number of fans, followers, posts, and blogs (see quote 14 and Multimedia Appendix 5 ).
Low cost: Social media is seen as a low-cost tool compared with traditional marketing tools. For small organizations with limited budgets, such low-cost tools provide new opportunities to communicate and provide information (see quotes 15 and 16).
Interactivity with end users: Social media provides a forum for individuals to connect with each other and to engage in more personalized discussions in a timely manner (see quotes 17 and 18). Data show active participation of users ( Multimedia Appendix 5 ) and better effectiveness. For example, end users can follow links and choose the path of information that they would like to explore deeper (see quotes 19 and 20).
Flexibility: Social media tools do not impose a strict structure on how the tools are used, how individuals choose to interact and access information using these tools, and how they are integrated with other media (see quotes 21 and 22). This was further evidenced by the links for YouTube videos that were found on many Facebook pages ( Multimedia Appendix 5 ).
Status: The use of social media tools was associated with a desire for status differentiation and perceptions of popularity, trendiness, reputation, efficiency, etc (see quotes 23 and 24).
Virability: Social media’s increased ease in spreading information compared with more traditional ICT—what we call virability—was evidenced by the ability to repost information on Facebook and Twitter ( Multimedia Appendix 5 ), sometimes through mobile devices (see quotes 25 and 26).

Replicate: Organizations essentially imitate their existing use of ICTs, but through a different channel to reach a different and broader audience (see quotes 33 and 34).
Transform: Organizations use social media for the same purpose as it uses ICT tools, but the message is transformed in the way it is formatted and delivered, to better engage end users (see quotes 35 and 36).
Innovate: To truly tap in the soul of social media, organizations modify the message or action for a new purpose, seeking different results. Such a strategy entails, for example, reposting a message, taking advantage of the virability of the media, and using blogs for press conferences or virtual billboards for advertising. Altogether such a strategy may ultimately enable the development of a community (see quotes 37 and 38).

Implementation

To better take into account the reality of their usage and context, organizations have had to deal with several challenges :

Lack of control: Managing the openness in communication that is enabled through social media ( Multimedia Appendix 5 ) and appropriately monitor the quality, quantity, and format of conversations individuals were having (see quotes 39 and 40). This difficulty concerns both the user contribution and the information that the organization and partners themselves provided (see quotes 41 and 42).
Technology-related issues: Although user friendly, technology usage introduces challenges such as forced upon updates and characteristics that create limitations (see quotes 43 and 44).
Diversity of audience: Reaching a wider audience creates challenges in tailoring the message to different communities (eg, an older population and less educated individuals; see quotes 45 and 46 and Multimedia Appendix 5 ).
Availability of resources: Finding the resources to develop and manage social media was considered challenging, given the need to find individuals with the expertise in both the content (cancer) and the social media tool. Moreover, there is a need to maintain a social media presence at a high level of interactivity, which requires an extensive amount of time (see quotes 47-50).
Difficulty in measuring impacts: It is difficult to define relevant indicators of success and objectively assess whether social media use truly helps meet goals (see quotes 51 and 52).

Assimilation

In assimilation, organizations decide how to optimally integrate the new social media tools into everyday operations.

Mindless/mindful: At the onset, organizations did not necessarily adopt or use social media in a well thought-out manner, with clear objectives in mind. Actually, the initial use of social media in most of the organizations was primarily mindless. This was particularly noticeable in the case of two organizations where the decision to use social media was not a planned event and where social media strategies were enacted to seize emergent opportunities (see quotes 53 and 54). The level of mindfulness of social media use by the organizations we studied evolved. With time, some organizations were beginning to reflect more about social media (see quotes 55 and 56). Interestingly, in the organization that was most mindful at the onset, social media usage continued to evolve in the same manner, maintaining a mindful stance (see quote 57).
Reactive/proactive: Above and beyond the mindful/mindless stance of the process, our results show that the social media strategies were at times enacted in a reactive manner and at other times in a proactive manner. Social media strategies were initially implemented mainly in a reactive manner (ie, in response to users’ explicit needs; see quote 58). Only one organization exhibited goal-directed behavior and demonstrated anticipation—a proactive orientation—that is, enabling change before such needs are overtly expressed (see quote 59).

Connecting the Dots

nonprofit organizations social media case study

We identified three clusters:

Cluster 1: The organization exhibits a low level of mindfulness and little proactiveness. The only strategy that was mobilized is this case was replicate. Hence, this organization mostly used social media to carry on the same activities but using social media (see quotes 60-62).
Cluster 2: One organization exhibited a fairly low level of mindfulness but a high proactive orientation; another organization exhibited a low proactive orientation but a higher level of mindfulness. In both cases, these organizations leverage social media to transform their message, using the particularities of social media to better engage users (see quotes 63 and 64). Despite the fact that these organizations are not both proactive and mindful, they do appear to derive higher value from their social media strategies in terms of health promotion (see quotes 65 and 66) than organizations exhibiting a low level of mindfulness and little proactiveness (ie, cluster 1).
Cluster 3: Organizations exhibit a higher level of mindfulness compared with the other clusters. In all, three organizations did not use social media simply to replicate or to transform their message but most importantly to innovate by leveraging the potential offered by social media (see quote 67 and 68). Not surprisingly, these organizations appear to derive the most value from their involvement in social media (see quotes 69 and 70).

The Process Model of Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations

Principal Findings

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

Detailed presentation of each case.

Data collection tools.

Coding scheme.

Quotes from key informants.

Data dossier.

Fox KF, Kotler P. The marketing of social causes: the first 10 years. J Mark 1980;44:24-33. [ Medline ]
PSA Research Center. Mass Media and Health Practices Project: PSA Bibliography URL: http://www1.psaresearch.com/success8.html [accessed 2018-02-22]
Evans WD. Social marketing campaigns and children's media use. Future Child 2008;18(1):181-203. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Bloom PN, Novelli WD. Problems and challenges in social marketing. J Mark 1981;45(2):79-88. [ Medline ]
Mangold WG, Faulds DJ. Social media: the new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Bus Horiz 2009;52(4):357-365. [ CrossRef ]
Winer RS. New communications approaches in marketing: issues and research directions. J Interact Mark 2009;23(2):108-117. [ CrossRef ]
Chou WS, Hunt YM, Beckjord EB, Moser RP, Hesse BW. Social media use in the United States: implications for health communication. J Med Internet Res 2009 Nov 27;11(4):e48 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Thackeray R, Neiger BL, Smith AK, van Wagenen SB. Adoption and use of social media among public health departments. BMC Public Health 2012 Mar 26;12:242 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Ramanadhan S, Mendez SR, Rao M, Viswanath K. Social media use by community-based organizations conducting health promotion: a content analysis. BMC Public Health 2013 Dec 5;13:1129 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Thackeray R, Neiger BL, Hanson CL, McKenzie JF. Enhancing promotional strategies within social marketing programs: use of web 2.0 social media. Health Promot Pract 2008 Oct;9(4):338-343. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Park H, Rodgers S, Stemmle J. Health organizations’ use of Facebook for health advertising and promotion. J Interact Advert 2011;12(1):62-77 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
Antheunis ML, Tates K, Nieboer TE. Patients' and health professionals' use of social media in health care: motives, barriers and expectations. Patient Educ Couns 2013 Sep;92(3):426-431. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Rupert DJ, Moultrie RR, Read JG, Amoozegar JB, Bornkessel AS, O'Donoghue AC, et al. Perceived healthcare provider reactions to patient and caregiver use of online health communities. Patient Educ Couns 2014 Sep;96(3):320-326. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Benetoli A, Chen TF, Aslani P. How patients' use of social media impacts their interactions with healthcare professionals. Patient Educ Couns 2018 Mar;101(3):439-444. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Capurro D, Cole K, Echavarría MI, Joe J, Neogi T, Turner AM. The use of social networking sites for public health practice and research: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2014 Mar 14;16(3):e79 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Moorhead SA, Hazlett DE, Harrison L, Carroll JK, Irwin A, Hoving C. A new dimension of health care: systematic review of the uses, benefits, and limitations of social media for health communication. J Med Internet Res 2013 Apr 23;15(4):e85 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Househ M, Borycki E, Kushniruk A. Empowering patients through social media: the benefits and challenges. Health Informatics J 2014 Mar;20(1):50-58. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Litchman ML, Rothwell E, Edelman LS. The diabetes online community: older adults supporting self-care through peer health. Patient Educ Couns 2018 Mar;101(3):518-523. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Liang B, Scammon D. E-Word-of-Mouth on health social networking sites: an opportunity for tailored health communication. J Consumer Behav 2011;10(6):322-331 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
Ralph LJ, Berglas NF, Schwartz SL, Brindis CD. Finding teens in TheirSpace: using social networking sites to connect youth to sexual health services. Sex Res Soc Policy 2011;8(1):38-49. [ CrossRef ]
Swanson EB, Ramiller NC. The organizing vision in information systems innovation. Organ Sci 1997;8(5):458-474. [ CrossRef ]
Garwin D. Building a learning organization. Harv Bus Rev 1993;71(4):73-91 [ FREE Full text ]
Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM. Managing the Unexpected: Resilient Performance in an Age of Uncertainty. New York City, USA: Jossey-bass; 2001.
Ramiller NC, Swanson EB. Organizing visions for information technology and the information systems executive response. J Manag Inf Syst 2003;20(1):13-50 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
Sun H, Fang Y, Zou HM. Choosing a fit technology: understanding mindfulness in technology adoption and continuance. J Assoc Inf Syst 2016;17(6):377-412. [ CrossRef ]
Thatcher JB, Wright RT, Sun H, Zagenczyk TJ, Klein R. Mindfulness in information technology use: definitions, distinctions, and a new measure. Manag Inf Syst Q 2018;42(3):831-847. [ CrossRef ]
Dernbecher S, Beck R. The concept of mindfulness in information systems research: a multi-dimensional analysis. Eur J Inf Syst 2017;26(2):121-142 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
Fiol CM, O'Connor EJ. Waking up! Mindfulness in the face of bandwagons. Acad Manag Rev 2003;28(1):54-70 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
Valorinta M. Information technology and mindfulness in organizations. Ind Corp Change 2009;18(5):963-997. [ CrossRef ]
Swanson EB, Ramiller NC. Innovating mindfully with information technology. Manag Inf Syst Q 2004;28(4):553-583. [ CrossRef ]
Ramiller NC, Swanson EB. Mindfulness routines for innovating with information technology. J Decis Syst 2009;18(1):13-26. [ CrossRef ]
Eisenhardt KM, Graebner ME. Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Acad Manag J 2007;50(1):25-32. [ CrossRef ]
Jaccard J, Jacoby J. Theory Construction and Model-Building Skills: A Practical Guide for Social Scientists. New York City, USA: Guilford Publications, Inc; 2010.
Patton MQ. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2002.
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin 2015;65(1):5-29 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Edmondson AC, Mcmanus SE. Methodological fit in management field research. Acad Manag Rev 2007;32(4):1246-1264 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
Gilgun JF. We shared something special: the moral discourse of incest perpetrators. J Marriage Fam 1995;57(2):265-281. [ CrossRef ]
Gilgun JF. Grounded theory, other inductive methods, and social work. In: Thyer BA, editor. The Handbook of Social Work Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc; 2001:345-364.
Rivard S, Lapointe L, Kappos A. An organizational culture-based theory of clinical information systems implementation in hospitals. J Assoc Inf Syst 2011;12(2):123-162. [ CrossRef ]
Urquhart C, Lehmann H, Myers MD. Putting the ‘theory’ back into grounded theory: guidelines for grounded theory studies in information systems. Inf Syst J 2010;20(4):357-381 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
Strauss AL. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1987.
Mazanderani F, O'Neill B, Powell J. 'People power' or 'pester power'? YouTube as a forum for the generation of evidence and patient advocacy. Patient Educ Couns 2013 Dec;93(3):420-425 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Gentry S, van-Velthoven MH, Car LT, Car J. Telephone delivered interventions for reducing morbidity and mortality in people with HIV infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013 May 31(5):CD009189 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
Macnamara J, Zerfass A. Social media communication in organizations: the challenges of balancing openness, strategy, and management. Int J Strat Commun 2012;6(4):287-308 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
Aral S, Dellarocas C, Godes D. Introduction to the special issue—social media and business transformation: a framework for research. Inf Syst Res 2013;24(1):3-13 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
Trainor KJ. Relating social media technologies to performance: a capabilities-based perspective. J Pers Selling Sales Manag 2012;32(3):317-331. [ CrossRef ]
Welch M, Jackson PR. Rethinking internal communication: a stakeholder approach. Corp Commun 2007;12(2):177-198. [ CrossRef ]
Fetscherin M, Knolmayer G. Business models for content delivery: an empirical analysis of the newspaper and magazine industry. Int J Media Manag 2004;6(1-2):4-11 [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
Holmes W. Trace. 2011. Crisis Communications and Social Media: Advantages, Disadvantages and Best Practices URL: https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1003&context=ccisymposium [accessed 2020-01-23]
Carlo JL, Lyytinen K, Boland Jr RJ. Dialectics of collective minding: Contradictory appropriations of information technology in a high-risk project. Manag Inf Syst Q 2012;36(4):1081-1108. [ CrossRef ]
Leonardi PM, Barley SR. Materiality and change: challenges to building better theory about technology and organizing. Inf Organ 2008;18(3):159-176. [ CrossRef ]
Zammuto RF, Griffith TL, Majchrzak A, Dougherty DJ, Faraj S. Information technology and the changing fabric of organization. Organ Sci 2007;18(5):749-762. [ CrossRef ]
Leonardi PM. When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. Manag Inf Syst Q 2011;35(1):147-167. [ CrossRef ]

Abbreviations

Edited by G Eysenbach; submitted 23.07.19; peer-reviewed by S Smith, M Jones, A Benetoli; comments to author 01.09.19; revised version received 05.12.19; accepted 15.12.19; published 06.04.20

©Isabelle Vedel, Jui Ramaprasad, Liette Lapointe. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 06.04.2020.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

Racial Justice
Collections
Climate Justice
Health Justice
CONTENT TYPES
Upcoming Webinars
Complimentary Webinars
Premium On-Demand Webinars
Submissions

How Nonprofits Use Social Media to Engage with Communities

Aine Creedon

sketch of the hands raised with logos of different social media platforms on the palm. used in an article about social media for nonprofits

A new study from the Case Foundation and social media for nonprofits, based on a survey of almost 500 nonprofits, helps advance the conversation around how nonprofits use social media to engage their communities. What is working and why?

To better understand how nonprofit practitioners integrate social media and online communications into their strategies, the Case Foundation in collaboration with social media for nonprofits, created an informal survey to help advance the conversation around how nonprofits use social media to engage their communities. Close to 500 nonprofit professionals, who are involved with running their organization’s social media and online communications efforts, responded to the survey detailing their own methodologies and practices.

The answers proved to be insightful and revealing. From these responses, we’ve aggregated key takeaways, tips and tools that have proven most effective for them and shared them below. (See full results here , n=480.)

Email & Websites Still Rule: Nonprofits overwhelmingly (88%) said their most important communication tools were email and their websites, even though fully 97% of them are on Facebook. This may have to do with the fact that in their mind, the pinnacle of engagement is a donation (47%). Clearly, simply getting folks to retweet or comment (18% each) is helpful only to the extent it culminates in financial support, which still typically happens through a donate page.

More Focus on Social: Just about half our respondents had one or less staffers overseeing their social media efforts, and the remaining half was split between teams using a social media policy to guide their efforts, and those winging it. This is actually more upscale than Social Media Benchmark Study ’s finding that most nonprofits only allocate ¼ of one full-timer, so it seems nonprofits are starting to allocate more personnel to their efforts . Yet lack of manpower is still the biggest challenge facing nonprofits, followed by moving beyond the “like” and transcending cute kitty photos.

Sign up for our free newsletters

Subscribe to NPQ's newsletters to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

It’s All About Moi : When asked how nonprofits engage their communities with social media, most (74%) use social networks as a megaphone, announcing events and activities and sharing organization-centric info. Only 53% actually follow the best practice of posting issue-centric content to establish thought leadership in their nonprofit’s area(s) of focus . Clearly, the sector still has a long way to go on this front.

Managing What You Measure: Although Facebook Insights topped our list of the most popular social measurement tools/metric (70%), followed by number of Twitter followers (43%), fully 60% of our audience still believe that there is no benchmark for what an average engagement rate is on Facebook . 22% said 2-4%, but from our personal experience, only the most engaging posts from nonprofits with highly active communities can hope to attract those numbers.

So what does that mean for you and what can you do learn from your peers in the nonprofit space? Check out these four tips aggregated from survey responses:

That does it for some of the big takeaways from our first-ever social media engagement survey. Be sure to check out the companion piece on CaseFoundation.org looking at survey results on engagement through social media and online channels.

About the author

Aine Creedon is Nonprofit Quarterly's Digital Publishing Coordinator and has worn many hats at NPQ over the past five years. She has extensive experience with social media, communications and outreach in the nonprofit sector, and spent two years in Americorps programs serving with a handful of organizations across the nation. Aine currently resides in Denver, Colorado where she enjoys hiking with her pups Frida and Tucker. She enjoys volunteering in her free time and also serves on the advisory board for the Young Nonprofit Professionals Network Denver and is the Marketing Liaison for YNPN Denver's Professional Development Committee.

Become a member

Support independent journalism and knowledge creation for civil society. Become a member of Nonprofit Quarterly.

Members receive unlimited access to our archived and upcoming digital content. NPQ is the leading journal in the nonprofit sector written by social change experts. Gain access to our exclusive library of online courses led by thought leaders and educators providing contextualized information to help nonprofit practitioners make sense of changing conditions and improve infra-structure in their organizations.

UCLA Launches New Latino Data Hub

A $500 Million Pledge to Support Local News

Online Dashboard Shows Real-Time Decline in Abortion Access

X, Formerly Twitter, Sues Group Calling Out Hate Speech on Platform

Empty Office Buildings May Have New Lives as Farms

A Satellite Assist in the Fight Against Air Pollution

Npq webinars.

Remaking the Economy

Worker Self-Directed Nonprofits in Practice

Racial Equity Backlash: The Response from Black Leaders & the Mandate for Action

Setting Bold Strategy: Relevant Approaches to Strategy & Strategic Planning

A Latino women with a buzzcut and red lips, looking into the camera and posing with her arm above her head.

Privacy Overview
Strictly Necessary Cookies

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations: Multiple Case Study Design

Affiliations.

1 Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
2 Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada.
3 Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
PMID: 32250282
PMCID: PMC7171585
DOI: 10.2196/15586

Objective: The aim of this study was to understand why and how nonprofit health care organizations put forth social media strategies to achieve health promotion goals.

Results: The resulting process model demonstrates how social media strategies are enacted by nonprofit organizations to achieve health promotion goals. They put forth three types of social media strategies relative to their use of existing information and communication technologies (ICT)-replicate, transform, or innovate-each affecting the content, format, and delivery of the message differently. Organizations make sense of the social media innovation in complementarity with existing ICT.

Keywords: cancer; information technology; neoplasm; organizations, nonprofit; social media.

©Isabelle Vedel, Jui Ramaprasad, Liette Lapointe. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 06.04.2020.

Publication types

Case Reports
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Delivery of Health Care
Health Promotion / methods*
Medical Informatics / methods*
Organizations, Nonprofit / standards*
Research Design
Social Media / trends*

Grants and funding

CIHR/Canada

Send us an email

A Strategic Guide to Social Media for Nonprofits

With limited budgets and small teams, nonprofit organizations already fight an uphill battle to raise awareness, engage with their supporters and generate donations. And when you consider the changing algorithms and oversaturation of social platforms, those goals can seem even further out of reach.

The good news is, with the right strategy and tools, nonprofits can overcome those challenges and use social to create the kind of meaningful connections that drive people to donate.

In fact, 55% of people who engage with causes via social media are inspired to take further action (Source: Georgetown CSIC).

We interviewed five nonprofit social experts to help you create a nonprofit social media strategy that will bring you closer to your supporters and help you reach your goals.

This guide details actionable tips to create a successful social media plan for nonprofits, like how to:

Set social media goals that support your organization’s objectives
Identify your core audience and develop personas to help you better connect
Determine which social platforms to focus on
Create a content strategy
Track, measure and share your results

Recommended for you

How the Royal National Institute of Blind People found a dedicated accessibility partner in Sprout

TikTok for “Serious” Industries & Brands

Sprout in Action

Mission critical: How to find the right social media management tools for nonprofits

Digital Transformation
Marketing Disciplines

Turning moments into momentum: How nonprofits can leverage #GivingTuesday year-round

Now on slide

Build and grow stronger relationships on social

Sprout Social helps you understand and reach your audience, engage your community and measure performance with the only all-in-one social media management platform built for connection.

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser or activate Google Chrome Frame to improve your experience.

Why crowdspring
Trust and Security
Case Studies
How it Works
Want more revenue? Discover the power of good design.
Brand Identity
Entrepreneurship
Small Business

The Ultimate Nonprofit Social Media Playbook: Strategies to Maximize Impact

Giving Tuesday is the most important day of the year for most nonprofits. As you prepare your Giving Tuesday campaign, remember that fundraising success for this day largely depends on social media.

How’s your social media content performing? Does your organization intentionally make social media a part of your broader digital marketing strategy ? Or are you unsure how best to integrate it into your donor outreach?

Developing a social media strategy for nonprofits can be both exciting and challenging.

Whether you’re just beginning to create a strategy or you’re looking for ways to boost engagement with your existing content, these best practices will help your nonprofit make a difference:

Establish clear goals

Begin by setting SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound) goals for your nonprofit’s social media campaigns.

These goals should align with your organization’s mission and overall objectives.

For example, if your nonprofit focuses on education, your social media goals might be to raise awareness about the importance of education and increase engagement with your online community.

A nonprofit focusing on environmental conservation can set a goal to increase its social media following by 20% in six months to spread awareness and attract more volunteers.

Choose the right platforms and tools

Select the most suitable platforms for your nonprofit’s target audience and objectives.

Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, and YouTube are popular for nonprofits, but consider other platforms like Pinterest and TikTok if they align with your audience and goals.

An animal rescue nonprofit might use Instagram and Facebook to share heartwarming stories of rescued animals while using LinkedIn for professional networking and recruiting volunteers.

Use tools like Hootsuite, Buffer, or Sprout Social for managing and scheduling your social media content. These tools can help you create a social media calendar, track analytics, and monitor engagement.

Create a social media calendar

Develop a social media calendar to plan, organize, and schedule your content in advance.

This ensures consistent posting and helps you maintain a cohesive brand presence across platforms. Include important dates, holidays, or events relevant to your nonprofit in the calendar.

For example, as you prepare for your Giving Tuesday campaign , ensure that you leave yourself enough time and align your goals with the broader mission and objectives of your organization.

A nonprofit focusing on mental health awareness can create a social media calendar that includes World Mental Health Day posts and weekly self-care tips.

Engage with authentic storytelling and visuals

The first step to improving your social media strategy is to focus on what social media is designed for—engagement.

Encouraging your supporters to get involved by following you and consistently interacting with your posts is important.

Use authentic storytelling to share the impact of your nonprofit’s work, featuring real people, communities, and success stories.

This approach fosters emotional connections and encourages engagement. Incorporate visuals, such as images and videos, to make your content more compelling and shareable.

A nonprofit providing clean water solutions can share a video of a community celebrating access to clean water for the first time, along with personal stories from community members.

Don’t make your supporters do all the work, though. You can make it easy for them to interact with you by strategically building invitations for engagement into all of your content.

Tell stories. Share short, engaging content through Instagram, Facebook, or TikTok stories, such as volunteer experiences or blog post highlights, to capture user attention. In each story, include a swipe-up link to a blog post or a relevant campaign, encouraging followers to take further action.

Incorporate interactive stickers . Add stickers to your stories, such as Q&A, polls, or quizzes, to encourage users to participate and engage with your content.

Ask questions. Start conversations by including questions in captions or graphics, fostering user curiosity, and encouraging them to learn more about your organization.

Collaborate with nonprofit influencers. Connect with nonprofit influencers to attract more users to your organization’s page, expanding your reach and potential supporters.

Ensure ongoing interaction with your supporters by responding to comments, answering questions, and acknowledging user contributions like donations or volunteering.

Promote user-generated content to showcase your nonprofit’s community and encourage further engagement.

Give followers somewhere to go

Encourage followers to visit your nonprofit’s website through well-designed landing pages .

To retain users on landing pages and prompt action, ensure your pages are accessible, targeted, and optimized for mobile devices, as many users access links via mobile. Consider Snowball Fundraising’s nonprofit website tips for guidance.

Evaluate your nonprofit’s CMS to improve functionality and accessibility. Create focused landing pages for specific campaigns with clear calls to action . Consider the most relevant pages for users to land on for general posts.

Foster a sense of community

Build a community around your cause by encouraging followers to engage with your content and each other. Respond to comments and messages, and consider hosting Q&A sessions or live events to facilitate discussions.

A nonprofit dedicated to fighting homelessness can host a live Q&A session with a formerly homeless person, allowing followers to ask questions and learn about the individual’s experience.

Emphasize transparency and authenticity

Be transparent and authentic in your communications, showcasing your nonprofit’s impact, successes, and challenges. This helps build trust with your audience and encourages them to support your cause.

A nonprofit focusing on disaster relief can share updates on their relief efforts, including their successes and ongoing challenges, giving supporters a realistic view of the work.

Address common pain points

Identify common pain points or challenges nonprofit founders face regarding social media and provide actionable solutions. Address these pain points in your content to demonstrate your understanding of your audience’s needs and expertise in the field.

A nonprofit offering support to other nonprofits can create a blog post series addressing challenges like limited resources, volunteer management, and donor retention, offering practical advice and solutions.

Keep your strategy simple and focused

Maintain simplicity and focus in your social media strategy by concentrating on critical objectives and platforms. This allows you to invest your resources effectively and stay consistent in your messaging and branding.

A small nonprofit can focus on Facebook and Instagram as their primary platforms, developing a content strategy around raising awareness, sharing success stories, and connecting with their community.

Drive intentional conversions

While increasing engagement and followers is essential, driving tangible results requires intentional efforts for conversions. Conversions include donations, newsletter sign-ups or registrations, and event payment .

Create campaign-specific posts directing users to robust landing pages for taking action. Here are some examples of directing followers to an off-app action for conversions:

Link directly to donation pages . Post a heartwarming photo of a beneficiary your nonprofit helped and include a brief caption explaining how donations made a difference in their lives. Add a direct link to your donation page in the caption or your bio, urging followers to contribute and create more positive change.
Share infographics explaining how to text a donation . Create an infographic detailing the steps to donate via text message during a disaster relief campaign. Share this on social media, emphasizing the urgency and ease of contributing to the cause through texting.
Craft videos that tell your nonprofit’s story and include a call to action. Create a video highlighting your nonprofit’s journey , including the founders’ story, milestones, and impact on the community. Conclude with a call to action inviting viewers to join your email newsletter or attend an upcoming fundraising event.

Paint a cohesive picture of your brand

Your social media presence is a crucial extension of your nonprofit’s brand, and it’s essential to present a cohesive image that aligns with your other marketing channels. Consistent nonprofit branding helps convey your organization’s identity, purpose, and values.

To maintain consistency across platforms, consider these nonprofit branding tips:

1. Research how your audience perceives your brand and ensure it aligns with your intended image. 2. Harmonize graphic design elements like colors , fonts, and icons across your website and social media accounts. 3. Develop a style guide to establish a consistent voice on all platforms. 4. Create a library of branded templates for easy and cohesive posting. 5. For nonprofit logos , draw inspiration from successful brands’ logos and analyze their effectiveness.

Consistent branding increases the impact of your social media content when shared by supporters, enhancing your organization’s recognition and reputation.

Measure and optimize your strategy

Track the performance of your social media campaigns using platform-specific analytics and third-party tools. Measure the effectiveness of your efforts based on your SMART goals, and adjust your strategy accordingly.

A nonprofit promoting sustainable living can track the engagement and reach of its social media posts, analyzing which content resonates most with its audience. Based on the findings, they can refine their content strategy to focus on high-performing topics.

While crafting an effective social media strategy requires time, the increased awareness and donor engagement make it a worthwhile investment.

Remember, social media doesn’t operate in isolation. Seamlessly integrate it with other marketing channels for a well-rounded strategy supporting your nonprofit’s mission.

More About Nonprofits:

How to elevate your nonprofit's digital marketing strategy, nonprofit lean marketing tips, 6 ways to optimize donations giving for your nonprofit, t-shirt fundraising: the ultimate guide for nonprofits and charities, 3 important reasons why you must build a strong nonprofit brand, crowdspring community gives back, nonprofit branding: complete guide to building a strong…, seo for nonprofits: 5 effective strategies for nonprofit websites, crowdspring community gives back - in our own backyard, how to choose a cms for your nonprofit, 5 tips for creating a better nonprofit annual report, nonprofit marketing: how to engage donors and volunteers with…, 5 nonprofit donation page best practices that boost conversions, 4 tips for creating branded merchandise for your nonprofit, four proven marketing strategies for nonprofit events, design done better.

The easiest way to get affordable, high-quality custom logos, print design, web design and naming for your business.

Actionable business & marketing insights straight to your inbox

Subscribe to the crowdspring newsletter and never miss a beat.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
My Account Login
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Open access
Published: 23 August 2023

Enhancing non-profit engagement: the extended model of webpage engagement and adoption for strategic management

María Victoria Carrillo-Durán ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1256-8870 1 ,
Juan Luis Tato-Jiménez 1 ,
Chris Chapleo 2 &
Lara Sepulcri 3

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume 10 , Article number: 524 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

994 Accesses

Metrics details

Business and management
Information systems and information technology

This paper examines the study of Non-Profit Organization’s (NPOs’) webpages through the Strategic Online Communication Approach (SOCA) context to underpin public engagement. Although it can be argued that social networking sites such as Facebook or Twitter have a significant role in interactive online engagement, it is often webpages that have the critical role in creating engagement in the initial (and arguably most important) stage of opening dialog. In the SOCA context NPOs’ webpages need to be strategically planned and aligned with the NPOs goals and targeted to various stakeholders such as the general public, volunteers and donors. In general terms, this research resulted in a sequential model called EMEA (Extended Model of Webpages Engagement and Adoption) with three levels (information, interaction, and action). The EMEA model shows the efficiency and maturity of the webpages, indicating the level of engagement that should be possible, to therefore improve relationships with the public and obtain better results. Results show that the more ‘ways to help’ an NPO presents on its webpage, the greater the level of potential engagement (as different options to collaborate, convey trustworthy information, and control content are evident). Finally, this research showed that the greater engagement achieved by NPOs, the better the likely results and therefore the effective application of EMEA can explain and even predict success for NPOs. This paper only addresses web pages, and therefore further research is needed to clarify the role of Social Networking Sites (SNS) for high interactivity. Secondly, although EMEA is able to explain and even predict the levels of engagement, it is not evident that it necessarily occurs. Finally, although EMEA is applied correctly, it does not guarantee that NPOs are managing communication in the context of SOCA, since a multi-channel online strategy is required.

Communication tools and their support for integration in transdisciplinary research projects

Factors influencing continuance intention of participants in crowdsourcing

Social capital development on interest-based networks: examining its antecedents, process, and consequences

Introduction.

The results of recent studies on NPOs (Ihm and Kim, 2021 ; Manetti and Bellucci, 2016 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2018 , 2020 ; Patel and McKeever, 2014 ) indicate that both Web 1.0 tools, organizational websites, and Web 2.0 tools play a vital role in communication. NPOs operate multiple internet platforms for stakeholder relationship building and have crafted websites that play a key role in dialogic communication (Albanna et al., 2022 ; Di Lauro et al., 2019 ; Kim et al., 2014 ) but use Facebook and Twitter (Haro-de-Rosario et al., 2018 ; Lovejoy et al., 2012 ) to supplement dialogic features that are limited on websites.

It’s important to note that websites still play a crucial role in a digital strategy as they complement social media channels by providing more in-depth information and establishing initial communication with external stakeholders, such as possible donors or supporters (Ihm and Kim, 2021 ; Lovejoy and Saxton, 2012 ; Milde and Yawson, 2017 ; Seo and Vu, 2020 ). Additionally, websites can be used in marketing communications strategy, for example, to promote events and increase the possibility of receiving donations and funding (Milde and Yawson, 2017 ; Seo and Vu, 2020 ).

Authors found that NPOs tend to prefer their websites over e.g., Facebook when conducting online stewardship, particularly for three stewardship dimensions: reciprocity, responsibility, and reporting (Waters and Feneley, 2013 ). Others argue that even although NPOs are managing social media such as Facebook or Twitter, they utilize their website to direct stakeholders to external social media sites (Campbell and Lambright, 2020 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ).

However, it’s important for NPO’s websites to prioritize key characteristics such as visual appeal, mobile-responsiveness, and ease of navigation. The websites should be designed to be as simple and user-friendly as other marketing materials (McKnight, 2023 ) and this is an important justification for a model to improve the capability of websites to drive stakeholder engagement (Philips, 2022 ). Accordingly, there are some important actions that NPOs can undertake on a website to increase lead generation, such as encouraging site visitors to subscribe to newsletters, thus capturing information on possible supporters (Philips, 2022 ).

Therefore, the NPO’s website is a core platform to communicate their purpose and mission, describe their work and their ways to help, generate interactions with different publics and facilitate online transactions (e.g. to increase fundraising) (Di Lauro et al., 2019 ; Kirk et al., 2016 ; Panic et al., 2016 ).

To optimize the above, organizations increasingly prefer websites where they have complete control over message design and content (Philips, 2022 ). Therefore, to strategically manage their online communication, NPO communication professionals utilize websites, followed by others social media channels, specifically Facebook, Twitter, blog site, Instagram, podcast, Snapchat, and Pinterest (Seo and Vu, 2020 ).

Overall, websites are a very important channel and fulfill two core organizational functions: to provide information and to generate dialog with stakeholders (Lovejoy and Saxton, 2012 ). It is evident that websites can drive meaningful interaction with NPO audiences, but these organizations often do not fully use their websites in a strategic and interactive way, (Lovejoy and Saxton, 2012 ). Similarly, some researchers doubt that NPOs are using websites effectively as part of a Strategic Online Communication Approach (SOCA) (Lee and Blouin, 2019 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ).

In summary, the main objective of this work was to define a model able to measure the efficiency and maturity of NPO websites in building engagement with stakeholders, and to underpin how they should be planned in the context of a Strategic Online Communication Approach (SOCA) for better results.

There are two key hypotheses that derive from the above:

H1: The number of ways in which NPO’s help will influence positively on the achievement of engagement.

H2: NPOs engagement with the public will positively influence NPOs results.

The essential novelty of the research is that it seeks to determine whether the effective application of a model (EMEA) can explain and even predict success for NPOs via their websites.

Literature review

The role of webpages in the strategic online communication approach (soca) for npos.

Despite previous studies that agree the importance of corporate websites as channels for communication between organizations and their stakeholders (Aziz and Kamaludin, 2015 ; Huang and Ku, 2016 ; Kent et al., 2003 ; Simões et al., 2015 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ; Philips, 2022 ), there is still limited information available to guide NPO’s construction of their websites (Akrimi and Khemakhem, 2014 ; Seo and Vu, 2020 ) so in essence, the study of corporate websites has not properly addressed how they contribute to strategic corporate communication, especially in the non-profit sector.

In summary, although NPOs use websites, they have not always used them strategically (Gandía, 2011 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ; Saxton and Guo, 2011 ). In this work (Figs. 1 ) utilizing the Strategic Online Communication Approach (SOCA) websites are studied as one instrument of the mix of corporate communications (Gurău, 2008 ; Lovejoy and Saxton, 2012 ). In the SOCA context webpages must be correctly managed to drive engagement (as the core purpose) using various channels in a longer term (not short term) focus, aligned with business goals, and targeted to stakeholders (Albanna et al., 2022 ). The SOCA framework advocates managing webpages with engagement as a primary purpose.

Source: the authors.

The reality shows that although websites are continuously evolving (and varying levels of complexity and functionality are needed) they may be simply an online presence, and the existence of a corporate website, therefore does not guarantee that it is fulfilling any strategic online corporate communication function. Also, relationship nurturing is possible on webpages, not only on social media such as Facebook or Twitter (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ). Although it is suggested that webpages have demonstrated value in nurturing relationships, there is a lack of recent literature that explores how to improve websites for engagement (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ) in line with the Strategic Online Communication Approach (SOCA).

Thus, engagement is a strategic function that needs to be properly planned and this has not been studied in the context of webpages. The question that arises is whether NPOs are using websites (as part of a social media strategy) efficiently to maximize stakeholder engagement?

As stated in the introduction, the main objective of this work was therefore to define a model able to measure the efficiency and maturity of NPO websites in building engagement with stakeholders, to underpin how they must be planned in the context of a Strategic Online Communication Approach (SOCA) for better results.

Understanding engagement in the SOCA context

The concept of engagement can be seen as an approach that drives stakeholder interactions and influences them to make decisions that generate social capital (Taylor and Kent, 2014 ). The literature highlights five key points for websites: the dialogic loop, the usefulness of information, the generation of return visits, the ease of the interface and the rule of conservations of visitors (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ; Taylor and Kent, 2014 ). The first one, “dialogic loop”, was the most important, as it allows the website user to provide feedback and interact with the organization. Although dialogic loop is a ‘condition sine qua non’ it is not sufficient alone to engage the public. Therefore, engagement is not only dialogic communication, but also an “affective, cognitive, and behavioral state” (Dhanesh, 2017 , p. 931).

In the digital environment, the engagement concept takes a center stage (Taylor and Kent, 2014 ). Engagement is a multidimensional concept, (Dijkmans et al. 2015 , p. 59) defined as "a combination of cognitive aspects (e.g., being interested in a company’s activities), behavioral aspects (participation in the company’s activities), and/or emotional aspects (feeling positive about a company’s activities)".

Three dimensions were identified within engagement: the behavioral or dialogic dimension (based on the dialogic loop, e.g. when someone visits webpages to be informed of something), the cognitive dimension, comprising interest in the organization and its contents (the start of the real interactivity, e.g. when someone downloads material, or asks for information), and the emotional dimension based on feelings towards the firm to that lead to action (e.g. in the case of NPOs when someone introduces personal information, as a donor or a volunteer) (Carrillo-Durán and García, 2020 ).

Therefore, engaging stakeholders on websites is possible by going through the three dimensions sequentially (Carrillo-Durán and García, 2020 ). It means that engagement is not a matter of ‘to be’ or ‘not to be’ on the webpage, but rather that there are different levels: the lower level is just the level of information at the start of the dialog; the medium level that involves interactivity (communication based on genuine interest) and the higher level (involving action and commitment).

How do webpages lead to engagement in the SOCA context for NPOs?

As discussed, in the SOCA context (Albanna et al., 2022 ), webpages should be managed to drive engagement with stakeholders in the long term and should align with business goals and results. In the specific NPO context it can be discussed as follows.

First, strategic communication should be designed around key stakeholder groups (Seo and Vu, 2020 ). For NPO’s, the public is regarded as the most significant stakeholder, with potential funders, current funders, other non-profit organizations, and journalists following them in terms of importance (Seo and Vu, 2020 ).

The most important thing to highlight is that when talking about NPO’s stakeholders, social media in general and websites are channels to support engagement, but none of them are exclusively able to do this (Albanna et al., 2022 ).

Therefore, one way to better engage general publics through webpages and generate the kinds of emotional responses needed can be through providing content on the NPO’s goals and ‘ways to help’ to catch stakeholder’s interest (Albanna et al., 2022 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ). The authors discussed that the more ways and opportunities to develop the relationship, the greater the stakeholder engagement (Hoefer and Twis, 2018 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2018 ; Tsai and Men, 2013 ). For example, for online donations, specific goals are helpful in motivating donors (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ), and the more goals provided gives more possibilities to engage stakeholders. Accordingly, the first hypothesis for this research is as follows:

H1: The number of ways in which NPO’s help will positively influence the achievement of engagement.

Second, in the SOCA context, webpages should be aligned with business goals and results, with funding the most important of these (Albanna et al., 2022 ). NPOs are pertinent players in making the world a better place (Kirk et al., 2016 ). Their websites aid in fulfilling their socially beneficial missions by being a platform to present themselves, to engage stakeholders around the world, and to perform e-transactions to raise funds.

Although many NPOs deliberately utilize social media channels as Public Relations and advocacy tools instead of having official websites to seek funds (Di Lauro et al., 2019 ), It seems that “in that scenario, the social media efforts are not capturing any new donations. In a worst-case scenario, those same donors could decide to give less when they are motivated to give from social media than when they are spurred to give by websites" (Harris et al., 2021 , p.3).

Therefore, in the SOCA context, the second hypothesis follows that the more engagement an NPO can get on its webpages the greater the influence on results:

Models of efficiency and maturity of websites

The sequential models of evaluation and website efficiency is considered an important research area (Law, 2019 ). In general terms ‘website features’ has been the commonly used expression when evaluating a website, whereas the term ‘website characteristics’ has emerged subsequently and is used interchangeably.

Among different models to measure the efficiency of webpages the Extended model of Internet Commerce Adoption (EMICA) has been often cited and has been applied in the agricultural and tourism sectors (eg Daries et al., 2018 )

EMICA is a scale to evaluate the efficiency of websites through sequential stages. The implication is that dialog is the pinnacle of communication (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ). EMICA consists of three stages: promotion, provision of information and services, and transaction processing. As sites move from promotion to processing through provision, layers of complexity and functionality are added (Burgess, et al. 2003 ).

To move from one level to another, a website has to collect a minimum number of attributes (García-Lastra and Escalera, 2009 ). This form of evaluation in the EMICA is called ‘analysis of the levels in a related way’ and, is employed in this research against the ‘analysis of the levels independently’. The main reason for this is to try to overcome one of the main drawbacks of EMICA, that a website can be on two levels at the same time (Schmid et al., 2008 ). According to these authors, the company experience in electronic commerce is expressed in website phases, also called steps or layers, each comprising certain features.

An alternative to EMICA was proposed using content analysis to assess maturity of websites based on four dimensions (Information, Interactivity, Online processing, Functionality) (Daries-Ramon et al., 2019 ).

Overall, there seems to be parallels between different levels on websites to measure efficiency and different levels to drive engagement. The comparison can be seen in Table 1 .

Some additional features have been used to evaluate websites in non-profit organizations. Kirk et al. ( 2016 ) proposed a four stages model with four aspects to represent the different levels of usage of websites by NPOs. These features were quantified to evaluate the efficiency level of NPO websites. In terms of engagement, writers discuss which features of NPO websites are more effective to engage the general public and, also the level of engagement created (Albanna et al., 2022 ; Hoefer and Twis, 2018 ).

Similarly, studies related digital engagement to the level of interaction promoted by websites (Dhanesh, 2017 ; Kirk et al., 2016 ). In other words, a high level of engagement seems to be related to how much a website can provide two-way communication between the visitor and the NPO (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ).

Extended model of webpage engagement and adoption as a proposed model

Based on the above, we propose a parallel model to EMICA called Extended Model of Webpages Engagement and Adoption (EMEA). Thus, engagement is possible at three stages (cognitive, behavioral and emotional) which resonates with the three dimensions of EMICA and the other models cited above (Taylor and Kent, 2014 ).

Thus, EMEA has been designed in practice as a data sheet to collect data analysis from webpages, and it is divided into three dimensions: Stage 1 -Information; Stage 2 - Interaction; Stage 3 – Action. As it is a sequential scale, the stages can be divided into layers, which demonstrates the advancement of the website through each stage. Also, as the final purpose is to measure the level of engagement, the more the website advances through the stages, the greater the engagement with stakeholders.

Measuring stage 1: information level

The first stage of information is also the most basic level of engagement. It is associated with a behavioral dimension in which resources that serve the stakeholder are “relatively passive forms of information-seeking” (Dhanesh, 2017 , p. 930). We propose that this basic information is expected by the user, and it is not powerful enough to create a distinctive image to achieve engagement (Huang and Ku, 2016 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ).

In terms of models and features, Kirk et al. ( 2016 ) proposed two levels of one-way information to non-profit websites called emerging presence and enhancing presence. In the same way, Huang and Ku ( 2016 ) found that Operational Management and Communication and Consultation are informational items in NPO websites related with the intention to donate money and time.

In the first Stage of the EMEA we summarize the features related to information on the NPO in websites (Di Lauro et al., 2019 ). However, we excluded the features that were not characterized as one-way communication (Kirk et al., 2016 ) because at the Information level of EMEA we assume a passive information search (Dhanesh, 2017 ).

EMEA: layer 1 of stage 1: information – basic information

In Layer 1 of the informational stage of EMEA, a low level of engagement is possible (Di Lauro et al., 2019 ; Dhanesh, 2017 ) when websites present features related to basic information in a passive form (Dhanesh, 2017 ; Kirk et al., 2016 ) such as: mission/vision, online contact form, contact detail, office location etc. (Huang and Ku, 2016 ; Kirk et al., 2016 ; Kirk and Abrahams, 2017 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2018 , 2020 ).

EMEA: layer 2 of stage 1: information – rich information

Going further, Layer 2 of Stage 1 advances to a richer level of information, but still low engagement, where NPOs provide relevant information to connect the interest of stakeholders (Dhanesh, 2017 ; Kirk et al., 2016 ). NPOs usually prioritize the principles of usefulness of information and visitor retention (Wang and Yang, 2020 ), and EMEA includes features as goals, press releases, news updates, board members, key staff, annual reports, or budget/financials (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ), organization structure, list of donors, information about related cooperation (Huang and Ku, 2016 ; Kirk et al., 2016 ; Kirk and Abrahams, 2017 ; Uzunoğlu and Kip, 2014 ). Table 2 summarizes the layers and features.

Measuring stage 2: interactivity level

Interaction is the second stage of EMEA and is considered as a cognitive dimension (Dhanesh, 2017 ). This level of engagement comprises interest in the organization.

At this level, the interaction with stakeholders evolves to a two-way interaction and, importantly, also a multi-interaction. The features proposed in EMEA Stage 2 enable stakeholders to develop an active relationship with the NPO website. We argue that the more that a relationship is developed the greater the stakeholder engagement (Hoefer and Twis, 2018 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2018 , 2020 ; Tsai and Men, 2013 ).

To shape the second stage of EMEA, the features that allowed two-way information suggested in the literature were utilized (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2018 , 2020 ). However, features that represent commercial activities, enabling money transactions, or volunteer registration were excluded from the second stage and are further discussed in the third stage of EMEA.

EMEA: layer 1 of stage 2: interaction – low interactivity

In this way, the features that promoted two-way information and improves the interaction with the stakeholders were kept in this EMEA Interaction level, including home page video, multimedia, email sign up and inducement, double opt-in.

These features are important to catch stakeholder attention and allow the NPO to create a continuous relationship (Hoefer and Twis, 2018 ). Other features suggested in this level are: search engine box, calendar of events, downloadable files (e.g., audio/video, pdf, etc.), stakeholders support (e.g., FAQs, sitemaps), major links on the homepage to the subpages (eg., RSS), links to other websites (Hoefer and Twis, 2018 ; Huang and Ku, 2016 ; Kirk et al., 2016 ; Kirk and Abrahams, 2017 ; Law, 2019 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2018 , 2020 ). Multimedia is a feature suggested from the hotel’s quality models (Law, 2019 ), as EMICA, and included sounds, video, webcam or panoramas, flash-animation and graphics not included before. Although this feature does not appear in non-profit models, it can add-value to the website making it more attractive (Hoefer and Twis, 2018 ) and increasing the likelihood of a visitor engaging with the non-profit organization (Bastida and Huan, 2014 ).

EMEA: layer 2 of stage 2: interaction – medium interactivity

Non-profits should communicate and engage stakeholders in their purpose (Hoefer and Twis, 2018 , Kirk and Abrahams, 2017 ), which can be achieved through links with social media to develop the perception of personal benefits and increase the willingness to interact (Avidar et al., 2015 ; Dhanesh, 2017 ; Hoefer and Twis, 2018 ). These features that enable interactivity are termed higher-level and include access to SNS’s (Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and/or Instagram) (Albanna, et al., 2022 ), social media sharing widgets, blogs and podcasts, forums, newsletters, terms of privacy (Hoefer and Twis, 2018 ; Kirk et al., 2016 , Kirk and Abrahams, 2017 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2018 , 2020 ; Uzunoğlu and Kip, 2014 ). The last feature involves trust where the stakeholder shares personal data with the NPO (Uzunoğlu and Kip, 2014 ).

EMEA: layer 3 of stage 2: interaction – high interactivity

Finally, in the third and final layer of Stage 2, there is high interactivity. This layer involves features such as: chat, exclusive areas for members, ability to leave comments and to receive feedback (Huang and Ku, 2016 ; Kirk et al., 2016 ; Kirk and Abrahams, 2017 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2018 , 2020 ; Wang and Yang, 2020 ). Table 3 summarizes the layers and features.

Measuring stage 3: commitment level

The last, third stage is Action/Commitment, and it is considered an emotional dimension and the highest level of engagement, as it implies a personal cost involving money or time. Donating reinforces the connection between the stakeholder and the NPO (Hoefer and Twis, 2018 ; Kirk et al., 2016 ) and online transactions of money, online stores and online applications to volunteer are among features proposed for NPO websites (Albanna et al., 2022 ).

EMEA: layer 1 of stage 3: action/commitment

In the EMEA third stage, we summarized the features proposed in the models from the literature that enable commercial transactions and donations of money and time. Thus, the processing stage was divided into four features: secure online transactions for donations of goods, online registration to be enrolled as a volunteer, online donation of money, and online store (Albanna et al., 2022 ; Hoefer and Twis, 2018 ; Huang and Ku, 2016 ; Kirk et al., 2016 ; Olinski and Szamrowski, 2018 ). Table 4 summarizes the features.

Methodology

The primary objective of this study is to validate a model able to measure the efficiency and maturity of NPO websites in building engagement with stakeholders. This will underpin how webpages can be optimized through planning them through the context of a Strategic Online Communication Approach (SOCA).

To define a model able to measure the efficiency and maturity of NPO websites in building engagement with stakeholders, a sample of NPOs webpages is needed. The source of this sample was The Charity Commission for England and Wales ranking (2020) ( The Charity Commission - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) . The Charity Commission for England and Wales (CCEW) is a non-ministerial government department accountable to Parliament. Its responsibility is to keep a precise and current record of charitable organizations in England and Wales and ensure that relevant information about each registered charity is widely accessible to the public. The CCEW assisted in this study in two ways. First, providing the sample composed of the top 50 charities by income from England and Wales. Although it is a non-probabilistic sampling that involves selecting participants for a study from those who are readily available, it is considered sufficient to apply our methodology in the context of an exploratory and descriptive study.

The selection by income was made following additional research, as in NPOs’ online context the level of income was determinant to engaging the public and that the organization’s website appears to be an effective tool for achieving that objective (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ). For NPOs there was a positive relationship between the size of the communication team (which is supposed to be more consistent in bigger organizations with higher incomes) and the importance of the organization’s website for its external communication (Seo and Vu, 2020 ) argue that.

Second, in the quantitative part of this research, the CCEW provides accurate information, widely available to the public, about each registered charity, such as: last recorded income, last recorded expenditure, groups targeted, ways to help and projects undertaken (Charity Comission for England and Wales, 2020 ). This information was fundamental to create quantitative variables that were used in the quantitative part of this study.

The dependent and independent variables

Drawing from the literature these are the variables employed in this research:

Variable 1: “Engagement” is the main dependent variable in this study, and it depends upon independent variables explained below.

According to the literature, sequential engagement at different levels through webpages (EMEA: Tables 1 – 3 ) can be measured, particularly, the efficiency and maturity of webpages in driving engagement. In this study, engagement is possible on webpages through EMEA in the SOCA context.

Variable 2: “Results” is considered the second dependent variable. This is because it depends on other variables around NPOs, such as the number of ways to help the organization, and the possible levels of engagement (Kirk et al., 2016 ; Seo and Vu, 2020 ). “Results” is a variable measured through two indicators: “Last recorded income” and “Last recorded expenditure” obtained from CCEW (Charity Comission for England and Wales, 2020 ).

“Last recorded income” was particularly key to rank the sample in terms of income, due to the positive relationship between the larger organizational size, better results, greater importance given to the communication team, and the organization’s webpage for its external communication (Seo and Vu, 2020 ).

Variable 3: “Number of groups targeted”, this variable is an independent variable referring to the various stakeholders of NPOs. An NPO employs their website as a way of communication between itself and its audience in building relations, so the more stakeholders they have, the more nurturing relationships they cultivate and greater possibilities to build engagement (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ; Seo and Vu, 2020 ). This information was not directly present in the CCEW database as a numerical variable and was therefore calculated as a quantitative variable by the authors from the CCEW list of stakeholders for each charity.

Variable 4: “Number of ways to help” is an independent variable related to the mission of the organization and their main principles applied to stakeholders. By utilizing NPO websites to openly share information, show opportunities to help people and contribute to the NPOs’ cause, opportunities for engagement increase (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ). This information was also not directly present in CCEW database, and so was calculated as a numerical variable by authors based on CCEW information provided.

Variable 5: “Number of things does”, is an independent variable related to projects the NPO develops and manages. A NPO uses its website to not only present its mission and principles, but also to present the way in which they are successfully using resources on projects (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ). Therefore, the more activities undertaken, the more potential engagement. As with the last two independent variables this information was not directly present in the CCEW database, so was again calculated as a numerical variable by authors.

Stages of the methodology

According to the objective of this study to build engagement with stakeholders, the methodology seeks to explore the relationship between the activities and action NPOs develop and the level of engagement it is possible to reach (H1) to improve NPOs results (H2).

To clarify this, the methodology is divided into two parts and three stages as follows in Table 5 .

The objective of this work was to define a model (EMEA) able to measure the efficiency and maturity of NPO websites in building engagement with stakeholders in the context of SOCA.

The results are shown according to the stages of the methodology.

Stage 1: EMEA analysis

After defining EMEA (according to the literature), a data sheet was designed and applied to the sample (Tables 1 – 3 ). The results of the application of EMEA to the top 50 NPOs by income from the CCEW (Charity Comission for England and Wales, 2020 ) showed the level of engagement that they can achieve with their stakeholders (through their websites) (Table 6 ).

As shown in Table 6 , no NPOs reached the maximum stage (the third stage of Interactivity) or the level of Action. The majority of NPOs (23 out of 50) were in the medium level of Interactivity (the second stage of this level). Just 7 out of 50 demonstrated the low stage of Interactivity.

For the Level of Information, 8 out of 50 NPOs displayed the highest stage, and just 4 out of 50 did not attain the low stage of Information. Finally, 8 out of 50 did not attain any stage.

Stage 2: ANOVA and Kruskal–Wallis test

Progressing the methodology, the second stage involved EMEA data sheet analysis of webpages and allowed investigation of relationships between different stages of EMEA and different variables from The CCEW database (Charity Comission for England and Wales, 2020 ): “Results” (Last recorded income and Last recorded expenditure), “number of groups targeted”, “number of ways to help”, and “number of things done”.

This was to understand if there were significant differences between stages of the EMEA according to the quantitative variables from the CCEW database (Charity Comission for England and Wales, 2020 ). We carried out ANOVAs and Kruskal–Wallis tests. The results can be seen in Table 7 and indicate that there are significant differences between the means of the EMEA stages with these two variables: “last recorded income”, and “number of ways to help”. A certain relationship exists between the level of engagement that NPOs reached and these two quantitative variables, but the sense and value of these relationships is not yet finalized.

Stage 3: Partial least squares. Theoretical research model

Another objective for this paper was validating EMEA to get engagement in NPOs analyzing, according to the literature, the relationship between the activity of NPOs (“ways to help”) (H1) and the level of engagement possible to reach in terms to increase NPOs results (H2) and its predictive power.

According to the third stage of the methodology, and to understand what kind of relationship exists between these two significant variables: “last recorded incomes”, “number of ways to help” and NPOs’ level of engagement reached, we applied a multivariable method based on structural equations.

In order to validate our hypothesis and taking into consideration previous results, it led the authors to propose the following research model (Fig. 2 ), in which the variable “number of ways to help”’ can affect EMEA and this, in turn, the economic results of the NPO’s in terms of “last recorded income” and “last recorded expenditure” indicators. In essence, we argue that NPOs with more ‘ways to help’ will drive greater engagement and therefore move higher up the EMEA to improve their results.

Results of the model validation

Missing data was less than 5% and the strength of fit should be the starting point for evaluating the structural model (Henseler et al., 2016 ). The results can be seen in Table 8 . As it is a model with compounds, we focus on the exact fit tests based on bootstrap (Benitez et al., 2019 ). These tests help to achieve nomological validity.

All the measures and indicators of strength of fit indicate a good fit for the model (Table 9 ), and it can be stated that the model cannot be rejected from a confirmatory point of view (Henseler et al., 2016 ).

In the results for the model the “High Interactivity” stage got a very low value, not altering the content as this level did not filter any NPO, so we proceeded to eliminate the “High Interactivity” stage (Hair et al., 2011 ). The rest of the indicators of all the constructs have adequate values, which means that they have individual reliability.

To analyze the discriminant validity, we used the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio (Henseler et al., 2016 ), the result of which we can see summarized in Table 10 .

The results are sufficient as they do not contain the value 0.9 (Gold et al., 2001 ) or the more restrictive value of 0.85 (Kline, 2011 ). This implies that “Number of ways to help” and “NPOs Results” are empirically different. In relation to the formative constructs, there is no problem of multicollinearity between dimensions: Action, Information, and Interactivity (Diamantopoulos and Siguaw, 2006 ). The higher collinearity between indicators, the more difficult it would be to separate the distinctive effect of each indicator on the emerging construct, which could increase standard errors.

Final results

The path coefficients show the estimates of the hypothesized structural model relationships; Fig. 3 illustrates the results.

Source: research data.

The results can be seen in Table 11 . All the hypotheses are fulfilled. We have also used the Percentile method (Aguirre-Urreta and Rönkkö, 2018 ).

Next, we calculated the coefficient of determination ( R 2 ) that represents a measure of predictive power. It indicates the amount of variance of a construct that is explained by the predictor variables of this endogenous construct in the model (Table 12 ). The higher the value (between 0 and 1), the greater the capability the model has to predict for this variable.

The value indicates a weak explanatory power level for EMEA (Chin, 1998 ), and negligible for results since it does not even reach the minimum threshold of 0.1 (Falk and Miller, 1992 ).

We then proceeded to analyze the effect size, f 2 , which assesses the degree to which an exogenous construct contributes to explaining a given endogenous construct in terms of R 2 (Cohen, 1988 ). The results appear in Table 13 . Thus, we can say that the effect size is weak for the Results construct and moderate for EMEA (Cohen, 1988 ).

Since R 2 increases when predictor constructs are included in the model, adjusted R 2 is used, which controls for model complexity when comparing different model configurations (different numbers of exogenous variables and/or different samples).

Finally, we have calculated the predictive relevance of the model using the Stone-Geisser test (Q 2 ) that is used for reflective dependent constructs. The results can be seen in Table 14 .

The results indicate that EMEA has a medium predictive relevance on “NPOs results” and that the same happens with “Number of Ways to help” (Hair et al., 2019 ).

Although we used our model as explanatory, we do not preclude the possibility of using it as a predictive model for new scenarios. We used a procedure incorporated in SmartPLS called PLSpredict (Shmueli et al., 2016 ), and the results can be seen in Table 15 .

These results indicate that the model shows high predictive power for “NPOs Results” (Last Recorded Expenditure and Last Recorded Income) and low predictive power for EMEA.

Whilst an explanatory model has the purpose of testing causal hypotheses, a predictive model aims to predict new observations or scenarios, to predict observations in a future time, or to predict observations that were not included in the original sample used to test the model (out-of-sample prediction) (Shmueli and Koppius, 2011 ).

Conclusions

In general terms, this research resulted in a model called EMEA (Extended Model of Webpages Engagement and Adoption) with three levels (information, interaction and action) and it concludes that NPO’s communication through their websites has to be planned in the context of a Strategic Online Communication Approach (SOCA), should be long term, targeted to the general public, and demonstrate various ways to help so that it can drive increased engagement and consequently better results.

In particular, it is concluded that:

The EMEA model is a compound of three dimensions (information, interaction, and action) with different weight in the results. Action is the lowest. Every dimension includes different functionalities to drive a higher or lower level of engagement. Therefore, EMEA shows the efficiency and maturity of the webpages indicating the level of engagement that it would be possible to achieve so that it can improve relationships with the public and obtain better results. The final action and total engagement are most probably, offline, because of a multichannel communication effort (online and offline).

However, it is found that the higher level of interactivity (the layer 3 of Stage 2) is non discriminant among NPOs. This level includes features such as Chat rooms, Members areas and Ability to receive feedback. This issue can be explained since the high level of interactivity is usually managed through social networking sites (principally Facebook and Twitter) as complementary media.

Although it is said that social networking sites such as Facebook or Twitter develop better interactive functions than webpages, it is webpages that have a significant role in the creation of engagement in the first stage: the dialogic loop (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ; following Taylor and Kent, 2014 ).

Neither the existence of social networking sites, nor the existence of advanced functions on the web ensures greater engagement by themselves. However, this work demonstrates the capacity that webpages hold to achieve engagement if the EMEA is applied (although continuous management and ongoing work of the NPOs department of communication are important to facilitate this).

The second conclusion is that the more ways to help NPOs’ present on their webpages the greater level of engagement it is possible to achieve (hypothesis 1). An average Internet user, e.g., potential donor who is looking for information about a particular NPO, is likely to have first contact with this organization via their website (Olinski and Szamrowski, 2020 ). Therefore, NPO websites should present different options to collaborate (given that websites provide more trusted information and control over the published content) and should clearly differentiate from the websites of competing organizations.

The third conclusion is that the greater engagement achieved by NPOs the better results they will enjoy (hypothesis 2). This research showed that the effective application of EMEA can explain and even predict better results. E.g., the application of EMEA not only can facilitate contact with the donors, but also it can explain and even predict deeper relationships with them in terms of donation levels. Therefore, it is not only a matter or placing a donation button on the organization’s website, but also a matter or creating webpages able to involve donors sequentially and without gaps in the process of building effective engagement.

Limitations and future research

The authors acknowledge that work of this nature inevitably has limitations and can always be built upon. Firstly, the data only addresses web pages, so further research is needed to clarify whether "high interactivity" is effectively being worked out in SNSs as a future hypothesis. Additionally, EMEA can explain and even predict the level of engagement that can be generated through web pages, but it is not necessarily evidence that engagement takes place. Finally, it is said that the EMEA is a tool to manage web pages, but even if it is applied correctly, it is not a ‘sine qua non’ condition to say that NPOs are managing communication in the context of SOCA if it is not part of an online multichannel communication strategy and is developed with the help of the NPOs communication department.

Data availability

The data underlying can be found in the OSF HOME repository: https://osf.io/49shf/?view_only=2126100bcb9948bbafd324db2a0cd77b .

Aguirre-Urreta MI, Rönkkö M (2018) Statistical inference with PLSc using bootstrap confidence intervals. MIS Quart 42(3):1001–1020. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2018/13587

Article Google Scholar

Akrimi Y, Khemakhem PR (2014) An analysis of perceived usability, perceived interactivity and website personality and their effects on consumer satisfaction. Int J Manag Excell 2(3):227–236

Google Scholar

Albanna H, Alalwan AA, Al-Emran M (2022) An integrated model for using social media applications in non-profit organizations. Int J Info Manag 63:102452

Avidar R, Ariel Y, Malka V, Levy EC (2015) Smartphones, publics, and OPR: Do publics want to engage? Public Relat Rev 41(2):214–221

Aziz NS, Kamaludin A. (2015) Development of instrument for evaluating website usability focusing on university website. 5th International Conference on Computing and Informatics [ICOCI]

Bastida U, Huan TC (2014) Performance evaluation of tourism websites’ information quality of four global destination brands: Beijing, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Taipei. J Bus Res 67(2):167–170

Benitez J, Henseler J, Castillo A, Schuberth F (2019) How to perform and report an impactful analysis using partial least squares: guidelines for confirmatory and explanatory IS research. Inf Manag 57(2):103168

Burgess L, Cooper J, Alcock C, McNamee K, Doolin, B. (2003). Use of the web for destination marketing by regional tourism organisations in the Asia-Pacific region. In: Andersen KV, Elliot S, Swatman P, Trauth E, Bjørn-Andersen N (eds.). Seeking Success in E-Business. Boston: Springer; 2003. p. 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35692-1_13

Campbell DA, Lambright KT (2020) Terms of engagement: Facebook and Twitter use among nonprofit human service organizations. Nonprofit Manag Leadersh 30(4):545–568

Carrillo-Durán MV, García MG (2020) Exploring the need for stakeholders’ engagement through social networking sites to build the reputation of higher education organisations. High Educ Q 74(4):442–457

Charity Comission for England and Wales [CCEW]. (2020) The Charity Comission for England and Wales. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/charity-commission . Accessed 21 April 2023

Chin WW. (1998) The partial least squares approach to structural modeling. In: Marcoulides GA (eds.). Modern methods for business res earch (p. 295-336). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Chin WW (2010) How to write up and report PLS analyses. In: Vinzi VE, Chin WW, Henseler J, Wang H (eds) Handbook of partial least squares: concepts, methods and applications (p. 655–690). Berlin, Heildelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8_29

Chin WW, Newsted PR (1999) Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. In: Hoyle RH (ed.) Statistical strategies for small samples research (p 307–341). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.) New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587

Daries-Ramon N, Cristobal-Fransi E, Mariné-Roig E (2019) Deployment of restaurants websites’ marketing features: The case of Spanish Michelin-starred restaurants. Int J Hosp Tour Adm 20(3):249–280

Daries N, Cristobal-Fransi E, Ferrer-Rosell B, Marine-Roig E (2018) Maturity and development of high-quality restaurant websites: a comparison of Michelin-starred restaurants in France, Italy, Spain. Int J Hosp Manag 73:125–137

Dhanesh GS (2017) Putting engagement in its PRoper place: state of the field, definition and model of engagement in public relations. Pub Relat Rev 43(5):925–933

Di Lauro S, Tursunbayeva A, Antonelli G (2019) How nonprofit organizations use social media for fundraising: a systematic literature review. Int J Bus Manag 14(7):1

Diamantopoulos A, Siguaw JA (2006) Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: a comparison and empirical illustration. Br J Manag 17:263–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00500.x

Dijkmans C, Kerkhof P, Beukeboom CJ (2015) A stage to engage: social media use and corporate reputation. Tour Manag 47:58–67

Falk RF, Miller NB (1992) A primer for soft modeling . The University of Akron Press

Gandía JL (2011) Internet disclosure by nonprofit organizations: empirical evidence of nongovernmental organizations for development in Spain. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q 40(1):57–78

García-Lastra O, Escalera G (2009) El sítio Web como herramienta de aciones de esquí y montaña en Castilla y León. Bol Econ de Cast y León 21:79–83

Gold AH, Malhotra A, Albert H (2001) Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. J Manag Inf Syst 18(1):185–214

Gurău C (2008) Integrated online marketing communication: implementation and management. J Commun Manag 12(2):169–184

Hair JF, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2011) PLS-SEM: Indeed, a silver bullet. J Mark Theory Pract 19(2):137–149. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202

Hair JF, Risher JJ, Sarstedt M, Ringle CM (2019) When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Euro Busi Rev 31(1):2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203

Haro-de-Rosario A, Sáez-Martín A, Caba-Pérez MC (2018) Using social media to enhance citizen engagement with local government: Twitter or Facebook? New Med Soc 20(1):29–49

Harris EE, Neely DG, Saxton GD (2021) Social media, signaling, and donations: testing the financial returns on nonprofits’ social media investment. Rev Account Stud. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-021-09651-3

Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2016) Testing measurement invariance of composites using partial least squares. Int Mark Rev 33(3):405–431. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2014-03045

Hoefer R, Twis MK (2018) Engagement techniques by human services nonprofits: a research note examining website best practices. Nonprofit Manag Leadersh 29(2):261–271

Huang SL, Ku HH (2016) Brand image management for nonprofit organizations: exploring the relationships between websites, brand images and donations. J Electron Commer Res 17(1):80–96

Ihm J, Kim EM (2021) When nonprofit organizations meet information and communication technologies: how organizational culture influences the use of traditional, digital, and sharing media. VOLUNTAS 32:678–694

Kent ML, Taylor M, White WJ (2003) The relationship between Web site design and organizational responsiveness to stakeholders. Pub Relat Rev 29(1):63–77

Kim D, Chun H, Kwak Y, Nam Y (2014) The employment of dialogic principles in website, Facebook, and Twitter platforms of environmental nonprofit organizations. Soci Sci Comp Rev 32(5):590–605

Kirk K, Abrahams AS (2017) Evaluating public charity websites: stage model versus automated service. Nonprofit Manag Leadersh 27(4):475–491

Kirk K, Ractham P, Abrahams A (2016) Website development by nonprofit organizations in an emerging market: a case study of Thai websites. Int J Nonprofit Volunt Sect Mark 21(3):195–211

Kline, RB (2011) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). USA: Guilford Publications

Law R (2019) Evaluation of hotel websites: progress and future developments. Int J Hosp Manag 76:2–9

Lee RL, Blouin MC (2019) Factors affecting web disclosure adoption in the nonprofit sector. J Comp Inf Syst 59(4):363–372

Lovejoy K, Saxton GD (2012) Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. J Comput-Mediat Commun 17(3):337–353

Lovejoy K, Waters RD, Saxton GD (2012) Engaging stakeholders through Twitter: how non-profit organisations are getting more out of 140 characters or less. Publ Relat Rev 38(2):313–318

Manetti G, Bellucci M (2016) The use of social media for engaging stakeholders in sustainability reporting. Account Audit Account J 29(6):985–1011

McKnight T (2023) How to Build Nonprofit Digital Marketing Plans and Strategies in 2023. In: Portent Blog. Available at https://www.portent.com/blog/marketing-strategy/digital-marketing-for-nonprofits-a-step-by-step-guide.htm . Accessed 21 Apr 2023

Milde K, Yawson RM (2017) Strategies for social media use in nonprofits. J Manag Pol Pract 18(1):19–27

Olinski M, Szamrowski P (2018) The role of the Web site as a relationship building tool in Polish non-profit organizations. Eng Econ 29(3):341–351

Olinski M, Szamrowski P (2020) Using websites to cultivate online relationships: the application of the stewardship concept in public benefit organizations. J Nonprofit Public Sect Mark 34(2):149–176

Panic K, Hudders L, Cauberghe V (2016) Fundraising in an interactive online environment. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q 45(2):333–350

Patel SJ, McKeever BW (2014) Health nonprofits online: the use of frames and stewardship strategies to increase stakeholder involvement. Int J Nonprofit Volunt Sect Mark 19(4):224–238

Philips V (2022) Digital marketing in nonprofits organization: essential techniques for the new era. School of leadership and education sciences: faculty scholarship, 35

Rigdon EE (2016) Choosing PLS path modeling as analytical method in European management research: a realist perspective. Eur Manag J 34(6):598–605

MathSciNet Google Scholar

Ringle CM, Wende S, Becker J (2015) SmartPLS 3 (version 3.5.5) [Computer software]. SmartPLS GmbH. https://www.smartpls.com

Saxton GD, Guo C (2011) Accountability online: understanding the web-based accountability practices of nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q 40(2):270–295

Seo H, Vu HT (2020) Transnational non-profits’ social media use: a survey of communications professionals and an analysis of organisational characteristics. Nonrofit Volunt Sect Q 49(4):849–870

Shmueli G, Koppius OR (2011) Predictive analytics in information systems research. MIS Q 35(3):553–572. https://doi.org/10.2307/23042796

Shmueli G, Ray S, Estrada JMV, Chatla SB (2016) The elephant in the room: predictive performance of PLS models. J Bus Res 69(10):4552–4564

Simões C, Singh J, Perin MG (2015) Corporate brand expressions in business-to- business companies’ websites: evidence from Brazil and India. Ind Mark Manag 51:59–68

Schmid S, Cantallops AS, Pizzutti dos Santos C (2008) The characteristics of hotel websites and their implications for website effectiveness. Int J Hosp Manag 27:504–516

Taylor M, Kent ML (2014) Dialogic engagement: clarifying foundational concepts. J Public Relat Res 26(5):384–398

Tsai WHS, Men LR (2013) Motivations and antecedents of consumer engagement with brand pages on social networking sites. J Int Adv 13(2):76–87

Uzunoğlu E, Kip SM (2014) Building relationships through websites: a content analysis of Turkish environmental non-profit organizations’(NPO) websites. Public Relat Rev 40(1):113–115

Wang, Y, & Yang Y (2020) Dialogic communication on social media: How organizations use Twitter to build dialogic relationships with their publics. Comp Hum Beha 104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106183

Waters RD, Feneley KL (2013) Virtual stewardship in the age of new media: have nonprofit organizations moved beyond Web 1.0 strategies? Int J Nonprofit Volunt Sect Mark 18(3):216–230

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Extremadura, Badajoz, Spain

María Victoria Carrillo-Durán & Juan Luis Tato-Jiménez

Bournemouth University, Poole, UK

Chris Chapleo

FUCAPE Business School, Vitória, Brazil

Lara Sepulcri

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MVCD, JLT-J, and CC: design and structure of the paper. MVCD and LS: theoretical framework. JLTJ: analysis, results, and conclusions. LS: field work. CC: full revision of the paper and proofreading.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to María Victoria Carrillo-Durán .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Carrillo-Durán, M.V., Tato-Jiménez, J.L., Chapleo, C. et al. Enhancing non-profit engagement: the extended model of webpage engagement and adoption for strategic management. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 524 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01980-9

Download citation

Received : 04 October 2022

Accepted : 25 July 2023

Published : 23 August 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01980-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

The Ultimate Guide to Social Media for Nonprofits

Marketing and social media.

Megan Allison

Share this article.

With the rise of smartphones, it seems like everyone’s constantly on social media, making it the perfect marketing tool for your nonprofit! Infact, there are over 308 million social media users in the United States alone. Social media for nonprofits is one of the best ways for organizations to reach out, engage with the community, and promote the work they do.

Every dollar counts in the fundraising world, so the free marketing that social media provides can be crucial to raising awareness for your cause without breaking your budget. From sharing your mission to advertising fundraising campaigns, social media offers plenty of opportunities to help you boost your fundraising efforts.

Learn how your organization can take full advantage of social media in this guide!

Understanding social media for nonprofits
Choosing the right social media platforms
Key metrics to measure on social media
10 best practices for nonprofit social media strategies
Paid social media ads for nonprofits

Understanding social media for nonprofits

Before you start creating your social media strategy, it’s important to understand why it’s a crucial tool for nonprofits and how it can help you connect with your community.

What is a good social media strategy for nonprofits?

Your organization’s social media strategy should be a carefully structured plan with SMART goals, posting frequency, key dates (like an awareness month tied to your mission), and content guidelines for posts. SMART goals are the foundation of your social media strategy and should be tied to building brand awareness, increasing engagement with your community, or raising more funds.

Social media provides plenty of tools to help you create an effective strategy that can make a huge difference in your organization and help you meet the goals you set. Paid social media can help you further your nonprofit’s reach so you can reach and surpass the SMART goals you set.

You can also use tools to target specific audiences for your different campaigns, helping you ensure your reach the people most likely to support your cause. By targeting specific audiences, you can also tailor the type on content you’re posting to increase the likelihood of viewers turning into donors. When creating your social media strategy, research what tools can help you expand on your goals to make the maximum impact you can.

Why should nonprofits use social media?

One of the biggest reasons your organization should use social media is how cost-effective it is. Other outreach methods for engaging your community can start to be costly, but outside of paid advertising, social media is free! The average internet user in the United States spends over two hours a day on social media, so you’ll be reaching supporters where they already are.

And it’s a direct line where you can share the work you do with your supporters to provide transparency and motivate your community for action. Over 90% of the United States uses social media, including the people in your community. Social media helps you build more connections within your community, allowing you to raise more awareness and money for your cause.

Benefits of social media for nonprofits

There are many benefits your nonprofit can gain from using social media:

Reach . Social media gives your nonprofit the opportunity to broadcast your mission far beyond your local community. With the power of shares and the possibility to go viral, even the smallest organization can reach a global audience.
Engagement . Building an online community allows your organization to engage with your supporters on a personal level. Through comments, shares, direct messages, and fun hashtag challenges, you can foster relationships that would be harder to form through more traditional channels of communication.
Fundraising . Social media is a powerful fundraising tool! Some platforms, like Facebook and Instagram, offer donation features, such as donate buttons, that make it easier than ever for your supporters to contribute. You can also run fundraising campaigns directly on social media, encouraging your followers to share and donate to make the fundraising process more collaborative.
Transparency . Your donors want to know how their money is being used. Social media provides your organization with a public forum to share updates on projects, success stories, and any unexpected challenges you’ve come across. This level of transparency helps you build trust and encourages more people to support your nonprofit’s mission.

Examples of nonprofit social media posts

To help you understand what effective social media looks like and how it can help you engage with your community, you can check out examples of other nonprofit’s social media posts to see what works best for your goals. Check out your favorite organization’s social platforms or look at nonprofits with similar causes to your own.

To help you know what to look for, here are two of our favorite nonprofit social media examples:

screenshot of Brother Wolf Animal Rescue's Instagram campaign for social media for nonprofits

Brother Wolf Animal Rescue’s Instagram account is a great example of using videos to give updates on current projects. This post features a video of two cats the rescue is working on rehoming, reaffirming the organization’s mission and updating their supporters on certain animals’ journeys.

screenshot of Humane Society of Pikes Peak tiktok campaign for social media for nonprofits

Humane Society of Pikes Peak’s TikTok is a great example of raising awareness of their organization and engaging with their community. This post features a video of animals available for adoption and encourages people with matching names to come and adopt, providing a conversation starter for community members in the comments!

Choosing the right social media platforms

Not all social media platforms are going to be the best use of time for your organization because social media platforms have different audiences and features that better suit certain causes. Each platform offers different strengths and engagement opportunities, and it’s best to find two or three platforms that will be the most helpful to focus on rather than using them all half-heartedly.

Facebook

Facebook , one of the Metaverse social media platforms, is one of the largest social media platforms and has a diverse user base that spans all demographics, but depending on your community, you may find more interactions with older audiences on the platform. Your organization can create pages, groups, and events to engage with your supporters on this platform.

Facebook is particularly useful for donation campaigns , because it has built-in donation tools and shareability features. These shareability features make it a great platform to promote events and fundraising campaigns because it can help you reach more people with a common interest in your cause and ensure your current supporters know how they can lend a hand.

Instagram

Instagram , another Metaverse social media platform, is primarily focused on visual content and thrives on striking imagery, video, and storytelling content. Instagram tends to have a more active younger audience than Facebook, making it ideal if you’re looking to connect with a younger audience that’s motivated by visuals over words. Use this platform to post impactful images or videos of the work your organization does to emotionally appeal to potential supporters.

Features like Instagram Stories and IGTV, where you can livestream to your supporters, offer creative ways to share content and interact with your followers. Because it’s part of Metaverse, you can also add a donate button, similar to Facebook.

LinkedIn is a professional networking site, and its audience is typically more career-driven and looking for thought leadership and industry insights. You can use LinkedIn to connect with potential corporate partners, recruit volunteers, and share professional content like reports, case studies, or success stories.

It’s also a great tool to recognize the work your volunteers do for your organization. You can create posts highlighting your volunteers and include key statistics about the impact you make in your community to help you connect with more people interested in helping your mission.

TikTok

TikTok is a newer social media platform that is geared towards younger audiences, making it the perfect tool to target Gen Z supporters. TikTok’s algorithm rewards creativity, humor, and community engagement by boosting the amount of people it shows your content to.

TikTok can be the perfect platform if your organization has a lot of fun and lighthearted content to share. You can use this platform to share inspiring videos of your work while including tips for people watching your videos on how they can help you change the world! It’s also an excellent platform for awareness campaigns and sharing educational content in a format that resonates with the platform’s trends.

X can be a great tool for your nonprofit to engage with your audience and raise awareness about your cause. With its real-time communication, X can be a great platform to provide updates to your audience on certain projects or throughout an event for supporters who were unable to attend. By building a strong presence on X and creating meaningful interactions, you can find a dedicated community and further your mission to create positive change in the world.

YouTube

YouTube offers a platform for longer-form video content, which is great for sharing more in-depth stories, case studies, and event recordings. This platform is perfect to help you provide background on your organization and specific projects to your supporters. Create professional videos where you introduce your team and mission and provide information on how people can help. You can also upload shorter video content to YouTube Shorts to expand your reach on the platform.

person using their phone for social media for nonprofits

Key metrics to measure on social media

Like with any campaign, it’s important to decide on how you’re going to measure the success of your social media strategy. Understanding the metrics behind social media is key to evaluating the success of your social media and help you fine-tune your approach as you go.

Interactions. Interactions on social media include every click, share, and comment your posts receive from other accounts. These are the tangible points of contact with your audience that show that your content is engaging and stimulating conversation with others on the platform.
Views. Views are simply how many people on the platform have seen your content. This lets you know how far your social media posts are reaching in contrast to how many people are interacting with it.
Followers. Your followers are your community on social media. These are people who enjoy your content and want to see more of it. Building a following is pivotal for sustained engagement on social media platforms. Every new follower represents new potential for support.
Conversions. On social media, a conversion might be a donation, a sign-up for a newsletter, or attendance at an event. Anyone who increases their interactions with your organization off of social media could be considered a conversion. Tracking these actions helps you measure the success of specific campaigns and overall engagement efforts.

10 best practices for nonprofit social media strategies

Developing and executing a powerful social media strategy requires both a presence on popular platforms and a deep understanding of how to use these tools effectively.

1. Finding your audience

Understanding the demographic profile of your audience is key to creating an effective social media strategy. Where do they spend their time on social media? What kind of content do they engage with the most? The better you know your supporters, the better you can serve and engage with them.

2. Authentic storytelling

Nonprofits often share very personal and human stories. Visual and emotional storytelling helps you create a connection with your audience and encourages them to share your stories.

3. Branding best practices

Branding is how your supporters recognize your organization! Create a recognizable and consistent voice and visual identity across your social media platforms. This makes your content easily identifiable and helps reinforce your organization’s message and mission.

4. Creating a content calendar

Plan your content in advance to ensure you’re posting in the most effective manner possible. Consistency is key to building and maintaining your social media community. Schedule your posts to engage with your audience regularly and at times when they’re most active.

5. Video content

Platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube thrive on video and visual content. In fact, video content is one of the most shareable forms of content you can post. Create social media posts that feature your work and visually compel people to support your cause.

6. Collaboration

Social media is made for collaborations! Partnering with other organizations or influencers in your space is a mutually beneficial way to broaden your reach and access new audiences.

7. Social media tools for nonprofits

There are many tools available to help streamline your social media strategy, from scheduling posts to analyzing data to engaging with your community. Here are three types of tools to look for:

Scheduling tools. Platforms such as Buffer and Hootsuite allow you to plan your posts in advance and ensure you have a steady stream of content going live at the most effective times.
Going live . Most social media platforms offer some form of livestreaming now! Livestreaming can significantly increase engagement, giving your supporters a real-time look into your work and mission.
Donate buttons . Platforms like Facebook and Instagram offer tools to registered nonprofits that make it easy for users to donate without leaving the page, simplifying the process and increasing donations.

8. Engaging with people

Social media is a two-way street. Respond and engage with your supporters in the comments and on their posts to encourage an ongoing connection with them to motivate their involvement with your cause.

9. Using hashtags and SEO

Hashtags and search engine optimization (SEO) help social media users find your content. Use relevant and popular keywords and hashtags in your social media posts to increase your visibility across different platforms.

10. Analyzing data

Understanding what works—and what doesn’t—is crucial when looking to refine your approach to social media. Many platforms offer analytics on who’s viewing anf interacting with your content, but for more specific data, you can use analytics tools to track engagement and make informed decisions about your content.

person using tiktok for social media for nonprofits

Paid social media ads for nonprofits

While social media is free to use, most social media platforms also offer some type of ad options to help you reach new audiences, amplify your message, and convert viewers into supporters. Paid ads are particularly helpful for expanding your reach for specific campaigns and events.

When to use paid ads

Not every post should be turned into a paid ad! Here are some instances where using a paid ad campaign on social media may be most efficient:

Campaign launches. When launching a new campaign or initiative, paid ads can help you generate initial interest and reach a wider audience.
Fundraising campaigns. For fundraising campaigns, especially during specific fundraising drives, such as Giving Tuesday, paid ads can be used to boost your posts and encourage donations.
Awareness campaigns. If you’re looking to spread awareness for your cause, paid ads can help you reach individuals who aren’t familiar with the work you do.
Event promotion. If your nonprofit is hosting an even t, paid ads can help you promote it to a targeted audience and increase attendance.

Benefits of paid ads

Paid ads may seem unnecessary, but there are some key benefits that can help make your social media strategy more effective

Audience targeting. Social media paid ads often offer targeting options, allowing you to reach users with specific demographics, interests, and behaviors. This ensures that your ads are shown to the people most likely to be interested in your cause.
Higher reach. Paid ads also have the potential to reach a larger audience compared to organic posts. They appear in users’ feeds even if they don’t follow your organization’s page which increases your visibility and exposure.
Linking to fundraising . Another key benefit of paid ads is that they can directly link to your fundraising pages or donation forms, making it easy for your supporters to contribute. This streamlined process can lead to higher conversion rates and increased donations.

Final thoughts

With so many new trends and algorithms, social media is constantly changing! But the one thing that doesn’t change is its usefulness in promoting your cause. Your social media is an extension of your organization’s brand, reflecting your values and dedication.

Once you’ve chosen the right platforms and strategies, your organization’s social media presence can transform your fundraising campaigns. By using social media platforms to share your mission, engage your community, and market fundraising campaigns, your nonprofit can increase its impact and reach new audiences. Happy posting!

Additional resources

For more information on how you can use social media, check out these additional resources.

Beyond Likes and Shares: How Nonprofits Can Foster Engagement on Social Media. Learn how you can engage your community on social media with this guide.
Nonprofit Social Media Strategy: 7 Steps to Connect with Your Donors . Look at this guide to create a better social media strategy!
23 Tools To Help You Create the Best Nonprofit Social Media Campaigns Ever . Take advantage of these free tools to create your social media campaigns.
Beginner Tips For Nonprofits Looking To Make The Most Of Their Social Media Presence . Use these tips to boost your social media presence.

Increase online fundraising with Qgiv! Request a Demo

About the Author

Megan is a writer at Qgiv who takes pride in helping nonprofits. In her freetime, she enjoys reading, music, and playing with her two cats.

You might enjoy

Digital Fundraising Guide: Ideas & Steps to Reach Your Goals

Donor Acquisition and Retention

How to Fundraise with AI for Nonprofits

Raise More in 2024: Nonprofit Fundraising Trends, Tips, and Tools

Browse All Articles
Newsletter Sign-Up

NonprofitOrganizations →

No results found in working knowledge.

Were any results found in one of the other content buckets on the left?
Try removing some search filters.
Use different search filters.

Our Difference
Proven Process
Certified Professional
Our Core Values
Happy Clients
Arts & Culture
Civic and Social
Environment
Human & Civil Rights
Human Services
International
Faith & Religion
Sports & Athletics
Content Creation
The Microsoft for Social Impact Grant
VisitorEmail Explained
Connect With Us

20 Nonprofit Marketing Campaign Case Studies

Whether you work with a small nonprofit or a large one, creativity is key in a nonprofit marketing campaign. A big budget with bland ideas won’t get you anywhere. What are some of the best ways to get the word out there? One great way is taking advantage of the Google Grant for Google AdWords, which you can learn more about on our homepage . If you have more questions, Nonprofit Megaphone would love to schedule a free consultation regarding this marketing opportunity with the grant and how we could help you make the most of it.

For more ideas, Nonprofit Megaphone has compiled a list of 20 creative nonprofit marketing campaign case studies across multiple platforms, from Twitter to your local sidewalk. Read on to be inspired!

Table of Contents

1. Pledge Your Birthday – Charity:Water

Charity:Water suggests that supporters pledge their birthday to clean water. This allows friends and family to donate to Charity:Water via social media and tracking how much is raised.

Why We Love This:

This idea encourages supporters to share about your organization online, and their posts may convince others who had never even heard of your organization to donate! It also allows your supporters to feel directly involved in the fundraising process.

2. Stickers – Preemptive Love

Preemptive Love sells a sticker pack along with other merchandise to raise funds to work toward peace in Syria, Iraq, and other countries.

Stickers are trendy right now as decorations for laptops and water bottles, especially with millennial supporters. Stickers can raise money for your organization while also advertising it, and purchasing stickers is less of a monetary commitment for supporters than a more expensive t-shirt.

3. Dress Up – Dressember

Dressember participants wear dresses or ties every day during December to raise awareness and fundraise for anti-trafficking efforts.

This nonprofit marketing campaign is a great way to get supporters involved easily, and you don’t need to limit the idea to dresses or ties. Like the all-black attire of celebrities during the Golden Globes, asking your organization’s followers to don a certain color on a particular day or month can help them make a clear statement of support and spread the word!

4. How-To Videos – Samaritan’s Purse

Samaritan’s Purse made a humorous “how-to” video explaining the process of packing a shoebox for their annual Operation Christmas Child initiative.

While the video was funny, it also explained important information as to what participants could or couldn’t pack, and showcased how easy it was to get involved with the project. A how-to video could show how simple supporting your organization can be!

5. Marathon Team – Ronald McDonald House Charities

Ronald McDonald House Charities offers a way for 2018 Chicago Marathon runners to race to raise money for RMHC, providing race entry, fundraising tools, and training resources.

Although your organization may not have the funds to include race entry and other resources, setting up a team for a big race like this can increase visibility for your nonprofit as participants post on social media, and maybe even wear a t-shirt during the race promoting your nonprofit. Consider local races that your organization could create a team for, and maybe even get your staff to run alongside supporters!

6. Weekly Newsletter – Feed My Starving Children

Every week, Feed My Starving Children sends subscribers an update from their blog with a personal story of a child helped by their programs.

For supporters of FMSC, this newsletter provides tangible results for their contributions. Because the newsletter is weekly, it keeps FMSC content in the lives of their supporters, reminding them that their work is affecting real children.

7. ADOPT an Animal – Lincoln Park Zoo

Lincoln Park Zoo has an ADOPT an Animal program where sponsors can receive a certificate of ADOPTion, fact sheet, magnetic photo, and plush of the animal for which they are sponsoring care.

By providing ADOPTion info, Lincoln Park Zoo gives their sponsors a better idea of how their donation is specifically impacting the zoo and the lives of the animals that live there. With the magnetic photo, especially, their gift continually reminds sponsors of their involvement with the zoo and the animals they are helping.

8. Twitter Polls – TEDTalks

TEDTalks posts polls on Twitter related to speakers’ talks, asking users to chime in on various topics.

Polling is a great way to highlight an issue at hand, and prompt followers to check out the actual content discussing the debate, like the TEDTalks videos. If users don’t know what their opinion is on the particular topic, polls showcase your nonprofit’s content and the answers it can provide.

9. Anniversary Celebrations – Special Olympics

2018 marks the 50th Anniversary of Special Olympics, and the organization is hosting celebrations to promote 50 years of great work.

Even on the organization’s website, the 50th Anniversary is a major focus, with the nonprofit looking forward to another 50 years ahead. This emphasis shows how much good the organization has done, and encourages supporters to continue making Special Olympics a reality. If your organization has an anniversary approaching, take advantage of this time to celebrate your important work with your supporters!

10. Snapchat Filters – Comic Relief Inc.

Comic Relief Inc. created Snapchat lenses and geofilters to promote Red Nose Day, which is dedicated to raising money to end child poverty.

Any organization can take inspiration from this nonprofit marketing campaign, even if your nonprofit doesn’t have the money to fund a worldwide filters. Geofilters and lenses can be designed, purchased, and placed over a small area for a limited time for as little as $5! Find out more on Snapchat’s website .

11. Donate Your Miles – Habitat for Humanity

Habitat for Humanity, along with other organizations like Breast Cancer Foundation for Research and The Salvation Army, partner with Delta Airlines to allow Delta members to donate their reward miles to help volunteers and others get where they need to be.

When thinking about fundraising opportunities, don’t limit yourself to monetary donations. Think about supplies or services that your nonprofit needs, and then partnerships or people that could help provide them. For these organizations, the sky really was the limit!

12. Participant Videos – ONE

For #GirlsCount, ONE is asking participants to choose a number and make a video , which will help the organization create one long video counting all the way to 130 million and representing the girls around the world who are denied education.

Creating a short video is a simple way for supporters to participate in your mission, and ONE’s eventual full-length video will certainly make a statement of how many people support education for young women everywhere. Consider how you can feature supporters on your social media accounts and showcase their efforts to make your cause succeed.

13. Virtual 5k Race – To Write Love on Her Arms

To Write Love on Her Arms hosts a virtual 5k , providing race merch with each donation and encouraging runners from across the country to join in by running or walking through their communities.

Even if your organization can’t host its own 5k in-person, a virtual 5k allows supporters to participate no matter where they live. This nonprofit marketing campaign isn’t limited to one place or time, but will still spread the word about your mission through social media.

14. Spotify Playlists – AARP

To promote the American Music Therapy Association, AARP created Spotify playlists to accompany their article about music therapy.

As of December 2017, Spotify has 157 million users your organization could be reaching with playlists. Whether your nonprofit is or is not music-based, developing a relevant playlist with a branded image can get people listening to songs related to your cause and remembering your organization while they sing along.

15. Social Media Challenges – Make-a-Wish Foundation

With the #ArmWrestleChallenge, Make-a-Wish encourages participants to film an arm wrestling competition and tag Make-a-Wish on social media, with the winner donating to Make-a-Wish and the loser doubling the winner’s donation.

The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge was an extreme success in 2014, and it makes sense for organizations to continue the trend with fun challenges for friends to do together in support of a great cause. To use this idea for your own nonprofit marketing campaign, think of a fun activity that your followers will want to do, and encourage them to do it for your organization!

16. Student Support – No Kid Hungry

Seeking to end child hunger in America, No Kid Hungry provides a variety of ways that students themselves get involved, including hosting bake sales, getting an internship with the nonprofit, and suggesting their own ideas to move forward.

Especially for an organization that helps children in many communities, seeking student support is an amazing way to tap into the passion and ingenuity of young people. If your organization is trying to think of new nonprofit marketing campaigns beyond the ideas we’ve suggested here, consider having an email or social media outlet for supporters to share their own ideas. For students, this is a quick and inexpensive opportunity to support your cause.

17. Phone Apps – Best Friends Animal Society

The My Dog ID app matched users with their “dog twin” through a photo, encouraged them to share the results on social media, and helped them search for adoptable dogs in their area.

Whether or not your nonprofit creates an app, having an interactive experience that matches users with personalized results encourages them to share. Buzzfeed Quizzes are very popular versions of this. Brainstorm how your organization could develop something like this nonprofit marketing campaign that would have users telling their friends to participate, too!

18. Street Art – Crossroads Community

To promote their NYC soup kitchen, Crossroads Community created street art showing faces with mouths filled with garbage, highlighting the difficulties of the homeless community

The Street Fare project was designed to place information directly where the target audience were looking—the ground. Think about the places your target audience is interacting, and how you can bring them a clear picture of the problem your nonprofit is trying to address. Street art is one place to start!

19. Earth Hour – World Wildlife Foundation for Nature

Every year, the World Wildlife Foundation hosts Earth Hour , where individuals and businesses demonstrate commitment to conserve energy by turning off their lights.

Earth Hour helps supporters feel truly involved in the cause by giving them direct action to take, while also encouraging them to share about the World Wildlife Foundation on social media. What actions could your supporters take in unison to show dedication to your mission?

20. Recipes – Oxfam

Oxfam, which fights against world poverty, provides sustainable recipes on their website to show ways supporters can reduce waste right in their own kitchens.

Recipes are popular and practical content, and in this case, can get readers practicing what the organization preaches. If recipes aren’t relevant to your cause, consider practical content your organization could share in your own nonprofit marketing campaign. By providing information your followers are interested in, your nonprofit can offer them something in return for support.

Your Next Nonprofit Marketing Campaign

Nonprofit Megaphone hopes that these 20 nonprofit marketing campaigns have inspired you! No matter what great work your organization is doing or what budget you have, you can get creative to show the world how to support your cause.

Share This Story!

About the author: nonprofit megaphone.

AI and SEO Specialists: Why Your Nonprofit Needs Both

7 Reasons to Hire a Third-Party Specialist to Manage Your Google and Microsoft Ad Grants

Strategic Nonprofit Partnerships: A Threefold Approach to Success

Fundraising in 2024: 11 Experts Share Challenges & Opportunities

5 Tips for Getting More Email Subscribers

Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet

CSV all metadata
CSV all metadata version 2
modern-language-association-8th-edition
Other style
Other locale

Panyam, Sinta

Abstract [en].

The study examines the role of social media in non-profit organizations using the case study from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Thailand Country office. As Social media become a significant channel to raise the visibility and promote the work of the organization.

The focus of this research examines what drives organizations adopting social media through a model built round four key factors, 1.) The importance of social media, 2.) The impact to image of the organization, 3.) Communication strategies and, 4.) Characteristics of content on social media channels. The research aims to analyze mediums that affect the behavioral transformation of the four factors by integrated with the existing theoretical perspectives.

The research was conducted in the UNDP country office social media channels mainly on Facebook from December 2013 to February 2014, using content analysis and interviewing as main methods. With the adoption of social media, the main conclusion of the study: gradually impact of social media in the enhancement of NGOs images, the changes in the construction of the content, the popularity of the themes in social media influenced by the domestic environments in the country and yet a substantial potential of social media in organizational advocacy.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages

Keywords [en], national category, identifiers, subject / course, educational program, presentation, supervisors, morhed, anne-marie, morhed, anne-marie, uppsala university, informatics and media, lecturer, open access in diva, file information, by organisation, on the subject, search outside of diva, altmetric score.

IMAGES

Social Media Case Study on Behance
Social Media Case Study on Behance
Social Media Strategy for Nonprofits: 10 Potential Objectives
5 Examples Of Nonprofit Social Media Strategies (And What You Can Learn
A Nonprofit’s Ultimate Guide to Social Media Marketing
5 of the best nonprofit social campaigns

VIDEO

Effective Social Media Fundraising for Nonprofits Webinar
Social Media and Non Profits
Social Media Case Study: How Women Take Over the Streets of Bangalore Sporting a Moustache
Media Manthan
Mastering Social Media for Nonprofits: Strategies for Success!
Microsoft Cloud for Nonprofit Demo: How to Build a Dynamic Segment in Dynamics Marketing 365

COMMENTS

Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations: Multiple Case Study Design
Our study, conducted in the context of cancer, aims at understanding why and how nonprofit organizations develop social media strategies, with the goal of eliciting how such organizations can successfully leverage social media. ... Leveraging on the organizing vision lens, we adopted a theory-building approach, based on a multiple case study ...
Success in an Online Giving Day: The Role of Social Media in
The literature on social media usage by nonprofit organizations has broadened and deepened in the past decade. ... Dixon and Keyes (2013) conducted a case study of the "2012 Give to Max Day: Greater Washington" online Giving Day. Their research revealed how the employees of Washington, D.C. based nonprofit For Love of Children (FLOC) spent ...
Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations
Methods: A multiple case study design, using in-depth interviews and a content analysis of each social media strategy, was employed to analyze the use of social media tools by six North American ...
Social Media's Purpose in Nonprofit Donor Engagement
Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer ... Case study: Metrics make the world go 'round: How one nonprofit measures the impact of its social media marketing. (2009).PR News, 65(17) Daniels, C. (2010, 07). Nonprofits discover power of social media fundraising.
How Nonprofit Organizations Use Social Media for Fundraising: A
How Nonprofit Organizations Use Social Media for Fundraising: A. Systematic Literature Review. Stefano Di Lauro, Aizhan Tursunbayeva2,3 & Gilda Antonelli. 1 Department of Economics, Management ...
Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations
Objective: The aim of this study was to understand why and how nonprofit health care organizations put forth social media strategies to achieve health promotion goals. Methods: A multiple case study design, using in-depth interviews and a content analysis of each social media strategy, was employed to analyze the use of social media tools by ...
Modeling the adoption and use of social media by nonprofit organizations
Lovejoy K, Saxton GD (2012) Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17: 337-353. Crossref. ISI. Google Scholar. ... A Case Study of Serving Disconnected Youth in New York City. Show details Hide details. SAGE Business Cases. 2019. SAGE Knowledge.
Social Media for Nonprofits : Engaging with Communities
It's All About Moi: When asked how nonprofits engage their communities with social media, most (74%) use social networks as a megaphone, announcing events and activities and sharing organization-centric info. Only 53% actually follow the best practice of posting issue-centric content to establish thought leadership in their nonprofit's area ...
Harnessing Social Media for Good: How Human Service Nonprofit
levels of human service nonprofit organizations (HSO) social media engagement and reasons for use, and barriers to social media use. The second scholarly product was a case study of an exemplar nonprofit organization's Facebook posts. A content analysis was conducted of the organization's posts for four months to
Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations
Methods: A multiple case study design, using in-depth interviews and a content analysis of each social media strategy, was employed to analyze the use of social media tools by six North American nonprofit organizations dedicated to cancer prevention and management. Results: The resulting process model demonstrates how social media strategies ...
PDF How Nonprofit Organizations Use Social Media for Fundraising: A
Social media (SM) are widely used by nonprofit organizations (NPOs). However, little is known about how they are used for fundraising, especially regarding their benefits/disbenefits, and the optimum strategies for maximizing value from such campaigns. The study presented here aimed to address this gap by collecting,
A Strategic Guide to Social Media for Nonprofits
This guide details actionable tips to create a successful social media plan for nonprofits, like how to: Set social media goals that support your organization's objectives. Identify your core audience and develop personas to help you better connect. Determine which social platforms to focus on. Create a content strategy.
Nonprofit Organizations and the Utilization of Social Media: Maximizing
benefits of social media investment, and 3) tools and metrics for measuring return on investment and evaluating success will be examined. This information will be consolidated into a literature supported, step-by-step guide for NPOs to successfully implement and evaluate social media campaigns. Case studies of exemplary organizations, namely
The Ultimate Nonprofit Social Media Playbook: Strategies to Maximize
The first step to improving your social media strategy is to focus on what social media is designed for—engagement. Encouraging your supporters to get involved by following you and consistently interacting with your posts is important. Use authentic storytelling to share the impact of your nonprofit's work, featuring real people ...
Case Study: Charity Water
Home • Case Study: Charity Water. If there's one charitable organization that has been kicking butt and taking names with online fundraising it's Charity:Water. Launched seven years ago by twenty-something Scott Harrison, the NGO dedicated to drilling wells in impoverished communities around the globe has raised more than $100 million ...
Enhancing non-profit engagement: the extended model of webpage ...
This paper examines the study of Non-Profit Organization's (NPOs') webpages through the Strategic Online Communication Approach (SOCA) context to underpin public engagement. Although it can be ...
The Ultimate Guide to Social Media for Nonprofits
With the rise of smartphones, it seems like everyone's constantly on social media, making it the perfect marketing tool for your nonprofit! Infact, there are over 308 million social media users in the United States alone. Social media for nonprofits is one of the best ways for organizations to reach out, engage with the community, and promote the work they do.
Social media, signaling, and donations: testing the ...
Social media outlets provide nonprofit organizations the opportunity of opening new communication and disclosure channels. Organizations must decide whether to set up these channels. They—and in turn their target audiences—must also decide how much to use social media. In this study, we test a novel multi-level signaling theory framework to examine the relationship between social media ...
Nonprofit Organizations: Articles, Research, & Case Studies on
It's no easy feat to manage hybrid organizations, which combine the social mission of a nonprofit with the revenue model of a for-profit business. Julie Battilana and colleagues explain how hybrids can find success with a business model dubbed "spaces of negotiation." Open for comment; 0 Comments.
20 Nonprofit Marketing Campaign Case Studies
This nonprofit marketing campaign isn't limited to one place or time, but will still spread the word about your mission through social media. 14. Spotify Playlists - AARP. The Idea: To promote the American Music Therapy Association, AARP created Spotify playlists to accompany their article about music therapy.
The Adoption of Social Media in Nonprofit Organizations: The Case Study
The study examines the role of social media in non-profit organizations using the case study from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Thailand Country office. As Social media become a significant channel to raise the visibility and promote the work of the organization.
Full article: Nonprofit Marketing: A Systematic Review
The social-entrepreneurship advantage: An experimental study of social entrepreneurship and perceptions of nonprofit effectiveness. ... Modeling the adoption and use of social media by nonprofit organizations. New Media and Society, 15 ... K. E. (2016). Using propinquital loops to blend social media and offline spaces: A case study of the ALS ...
Nonprofit Scandals: A Systematic Review and Conceptual Framework
Sisco's (2012) case study of a series of highly politicized scandals involving U.S.-based nonprofit ACORN found that failure to follow communication best practices led to increased media coverage and exacerbated reputational damage. Specifically, the organization tried to deny the scandal and bolster the organization's image when a full ...

Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations: Multiple Case Study Design

Jui Ramaprasad

Liette Lapointe

Conclusions

Introduction

Theoretical Framework

Data Sources and Data Collection

Overall Findings

Comprehension

Implementation

Assimilation

Connecting the Dots

The Process Model of Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations

Principal Findings

Acknowledgments

Abbreviations

Social Media’s Purpose in Nonprofit Donor Engagement

Introduction

Where does social media fit?

What’s wrong with current nonprofit social media strategies?

What do people want?

Variable 1: Connectedness

Variable 2: Entertainment

Variable 3: Self-affirmation

How can nonprofit organizations improve their social media strategies?

If social media has not revolutionized the way people get involved with nonprofit organizations, where should it fit in an organization’s strategy?

Current Supporters

Current Supporters Network

Scholarly (Peer-reviewed)

Trade Publications

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations: Multiple Case Study Design

Original Paper

Corresponding Author:

Introduction

Theoretical Framework

Data Sources and Data Collection

Overall Findings

Comprehension

Implementation

Assimilation

Connecting the Dots

The Process Model of Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations

Principal Findings

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

Conflicts of Interest

Abbreviations

How Nonprofits Use Social Media to Engage with Communities

Aine Creedon

Sign up for our free newsletters

About the author

Become a member

You might also like

UCLA Launches New Latino Data Hub

A $500 Million Pledge to Support Local News

Online Dashboard Shows Real-Time Decline in Abortion Access

X, Formerly Twitter, Sues Group Calling Out Hate Speech on Platform

Empty Office Buildings May Have New Lives as Farms

A Satellite Assist in the Fight Against Air Pollution

Social Media Strategies for Health Promotion by Nonprofit Organizations: Multiple Case Study Design

Publication types

Grants and funding

A Strategic Guide to Social Media for Nonprofits

Recommended for you

The Ultimate Nonprofit Social Media Playbook: Strategies to Maximize Impact

Establish clear goals

Choose the right platforms and tools

Create a social media calendar

Engage with authentic storytelling and visuals

Give followers somewhere to go

Foster a sense of community

Emphasize transparency and authenticity

Address common pain points

Keep your strategy simple and focused

Drive intentional conversions

Paint a cohesive picture of your brand

Measure and optimize your strategy

More About Nonprofits:

Actionable business & marketing insights straight to your inbox