Study Methodology
The following report is a summary and analysis of three main data sets:
- In-depth, qualitative interviews with 20 organizations. The interview consisted of approximately 20 questions focusing on organizational metrics, technological capacity and requirements, approaches to strategic communications, and database needs. The open interview structure enabled respondents to use set questions as points of departure to explore and expand on a variety of issues.
- The dotOrganize survey, which included 34 questions organized in six sections: 1) organizational profile; 2) tools needed; 3) data management practices; 4) current level and approach to data integration; 5) technology habits and resources; and 6) election-related activities, with an additional area for open-ended comments.
- Directory of available online tools and resources. Part of our research involved identifying what tools organizers currently use, what works for them, and what’s missing. We began the process of compiling tools and resources from multiple sources, including publicly available wikis from conferences and gatherings, previous lists compiled by peer networks and capacity builders, audited nonprofit technology-specific email lists, the aforementioned interviews and survey, and the collective experience of the dotOrganize staff.
Because evolving technology quickly renders static lists obsolete, we decided to develop a dynamic online directory open to community participation. We used our initial tools compilation to seed the content, and we hope you’ll make it even more relevant by adding the tools you use, in addition to your reviews and ratings.
This report compiles insights from more than 400 social change groups, technology providers, and nonprofit technology capacity builders, examining the needs of organizers working to utilize new technologies, and offering recommendations for how to meet those needs more effectively.
September 21st, 2006 at 12:15 pm PST
I love what you’re doing with the Organizer’s Tool Crib. Nice job!
September 26th, 2006 at 3:02 pm PST
not sure how organizer’s tool crib is different from social source commons (beta.socialsourcecommons.org). seems like the same concept with a different implementation
September 27th, 2006 at 1:30 pm PST
Very true that the Organizer’s Tool Crib shares some similarities with the Beta release of Social Source Commons (SSC). We have been in ongoing communication with Aspiration (the developer of SSC) about this project. We are concerned about the same redundancies that you express. It is our hope that the Tool Crib can serve as a bridge between the dotOrganize Resource Hub Project and SSC, and ultimately that data will be shared across both services.
September 28th, 2006 at 4:09 pm PST
It’d be interesting to see some more causal analysis. Eg to run some regressions and see what things are related. Or you could use crosstabs (which you are doing a bit of), but linear regressions tend to be more scientific (and you can simultaneously analyze multiple causes).
For instance, you could look at the differences between organizations with different budgets, different constituencies/missions/types, or size. I’d like to see if the interests of the volunteer-led organizations differ substantially from those run by paid staff.
I’m a former grad student and would be willing to spend several hours run some tests using SPSS if you’d be interested. Assuming you have a good way of exporting the data set and it isn’t stuck in a data silo =)
September 29th, 2006 at 12:56 pm PST
Not stuck in a silo, but certainly in a wrangled Excel file! Interesting suggestions re: additional cross tabs…we’ll email you to discuss.