I had a conversation, recently, with a board member of an organization – a type of “foundation” that raises funds to support activities designed to advance/sustain their profession, who indicated that the board was “disappointed” with the total dollars that have been raised over their first few years.
When the organization was first created, they sought the advice of a development consultant (me) … who explained the basis of successful fundraising: prospect identification; determination of the needs of prospective donors; working with those prospects to find the fit – where prospect needs could be satisfied by making significant gifts to the organization; determining the amount of the “Ask;” and, actually asking for the gift.
The members of that organization’s board insisted that their organization’s members were different from every other group of prospective donors, that their members would want to help/contribute, that all that needed to be done was to make those members aware of the need, and that they wouldn’t have to be evaluated, cultivated and “Asked.”
Not surprisingly, those board members were also extremely uncomfortable with the idea that they’d actually have to ask someone, face-to-face, for a specific dollar figure. Their solicitations were all passive – emails and flyers lauding the goals of the “foundation,” signs and a sign-up table at meetings, etc. So, no surprise that they’ve only been able to raise 10% of the funds they’ve publicly stated were needed to do what should be done to maintain/advance their profession.
These are intelligent, highly educated, capable people who, like many who would be similarly described, believe they know fundraising/development better than those who trained for and have decades of experience in the field. Can you imagine how disbelieving, even horrified they would be if I told them I knew how to practice their profession better than they do ??
I wonder whether their inability/refusal to take the advice of the fundraising professional stems from a fear of having to ask people for money, from an arrogance often seen in many of the “highly educated” or a combination of the two. Is it possible they’d rather fail than overcome their fears of Asking?
Whatever the reason, this “foundation” has to choose between doing it their way, and not having the funds to actually do what’s needed to ensure their profession’s future, or….
This is not, by the way, an unusual occurrence … and it’s not something that only happens in relation to fundraising/development. It’s fairly common that people/groups/organizations are unable or refuse to accept the advice/direction of the consultant/expert from whom they’ve sought that advice/direction. I’m sure a psychologist could explain it !!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating
or expanding your fundraising program? AskHank
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Have you heard about The Fundraising Series of ebooks?
They’re easy to read, to the point, and inexpensive ($1.99-$4.99)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If you’re reading this on-line, and would like to comment/expand on the above piece, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply.” If you’re reading this as an email, and you want to comment on the above piece, email Comments to offer your thoughts. Your comments, with appropriate attribution, could be the basis of a new posting.
Are You Unwittingly Jeopardizing your Licensure with Patient Privacy Issues Online?
The objective of this article is to explore the issues involved in using online marketing of the licensed mental health professionals’ social media – especially Facebook – and remain compliant with the practitioners’ professional codes of ethics.
‘Content Strategy’ versus ‘Engagement Strategy’?
Question: Should licensed practitioners use a (presumably safer) ‘Content Strategy’ – versus implementing an ‘Engagement Strategy’, which is possibly more powerful? Note: an Engagement Strategy is generally accepted in the online marketing industry as highly effective step in helping to build relationship, and build that relationship to eventually turn online visitors into customers/clients.
Engagement on Social Media platforms certainly strengthens relationships and increases conversion into paying customers/clients. For general businesses of any size, Engagement is considered a vitally important social media marketing strategy. However, for professional psychologists and all licensed mental health practitioners, the
Engagement Strategy for Mental Health Practitioners
Engagement Strategy is questionable because all online activity must be compliant with the licensed professional’s code of ethics, especially patient confidentiality. Could it be a high risk move?
Engagement could/would successfully convert visitors into clients, but in the psychotherapy/mental health practitioner niche, the risk of harming client relationships is widely thought to outweigh the potential benefits. Additionally, clients’ posts/comments online are usually permanent, so if posts/comments are viewed as potentially harmful, this is a risk that could jeopardize the mental health professional’s reputation, and perhaps even their licensure.
Content Strategy & the Practitioners’ Codes of Ethics
Providing valuable, engaging, sharable consumer education is a critical component of a mental health practitioner’s marketing strategy – online and offline. This is the basis of a solid Content Strategy.
As a consultant, I recommend that Social Media activities be clearly designed to keep the mental health practitioner in compliance with their professional Code of Ethics, AND to avoid some of the risks to relationships described in professional articles now available online as guides.
In Support of the Content Strategy for Licensed Practitioners
So here is a summary of some of the key resources for supporting a Content Strategy versus an Engagement Strategy, as well as additional guidelines for successful implementation of Social Media marketing for mental health practitioners:
I recommend using the guiding principles of Dr Keely Kolmes, (www.drkkolmes.com) a private practitioner who is widely recognized as a Subject Matter Expert (SME) & Influencer in ‘psychotherapy and social media’.
Among other direct experience, Dr. Kolmes has held the job of ‘Digital Director’ for the American Psychological Association (APA) www.APA.org , as you can see in her CV.
Here is a quote about Dr. Kolmes that I take at face value as to her credibility on social media marketing issues:
“I have had the pleasure of interviewing and creating an online course with Dr. Keely Kolmes on the topic of social media and digital ethics. Keely is internationally known for her social media policy, which is used in many countries, including Australia. … There’s no doubt she is a leader in the field of mental health and on the cutting edge of developments in the realm of digital and social media ethics.”
-Clinton Power, Sydney Australia, Relationship Counsellor
4. Her article, “Managing Facebook as a Mental Health Professional” (information about privacy, shared friend networks, and some distinctions between profiles and pages) is a bit old – 2009 – and Dr. Kolmes updated it for Facebook’s Privacy update in 2010.
5. Dr. Kolmes’ “More privacy issues on Facebook” – April, 2010 – provides “a walk-through of adding a bit more security to your profile, although it is becoming harder to really completely secure any information on Facebook.” These articles remain on her website, and she continues to promote their ethical guidelines (as well as practical recommendations) in speeches, interviews and PR – globally.
Dr. Keely Kolmes’ Quotes
I’ve selected a few key ‘take-aways’ that apply to FACEBOOK – quotes from Dr. Kolmes’ articles:
Visibility, Exposure, and Self-Disclosure: “Inviting clients to your personal (social media/networking) profile can also be perceived as inviting them into your personal life (a code violation) … This can send mixed messages to clients, especially if they are unclear about therapeutic boundaries to begin with.
“Imagine how you may feel discovering that you and your clients have mutual friends. While it may not impair your objectivity as a clinician, it may subtly influence how you regard your patient in a multitude of ways, and it may also have an impact on how your patient views you and your relationship.
“The APA Ethics Code (APA, 2002), Standard 3.05, Multiple Relationships, states that psychologists should avoid multiple relationships that could impair their effectiveness or cause harm. Let’s say you decide you would like to be friends with some of your clients on Facebook. Do you want to get updates on your clients’ lives out of session, knowing before their scheduled session with you what kind of day they’ve had or that their relationship status has changed or that they were out heavily drinking at a party last night? What if a client expresses self-harm desires on her Facebook Wall? If you fail to act on cries for help on a Facebook page and your client harms herself or someone else, could you be professionally liable for failing to prevent harm? These are questions that therapists will have to consider when they establish online connections with patients.
“Deleting a client as a friend can be experienced as especially rejecting and complex—more so than declining the initial friend request in the first place. These are certainly thorny ethical and clinical dilemmas which require consultation and care.”
Dr. Kolmes’ Facebook Recommendations:
“In Patricia R. Recupero’s article, “Legal Concerns for Psychiatrists Who Maintain Websites,” she outlines how courts recognize three types of websites. (“Intermediate” sites may offer advice and may invite contact from site visitors.) … Be mindful that if you are creating a Facebook page or profile to promote your practice and you enable activity and interaction from clients on your Wall, you are turning your Facebook presence into an intermediate site. This can create potential legal dilemmas for mental health practitioners, as the interaction will need to be consistent with professional standards of care. It also means that you could be having public interactions on the site with people who later become clients which raises additional issues related to confidentiality and HIPAA related communication protocols.
“… clients have no duty to be private or confidential about their relationship with us, and some of them may feel comfortable with a public link to our pages, or even saying in public that they are our clients. That is their prerogative. But it does not relieve us of our own duty to provide confidentiality to them
“To read more and stay current with news about Facebook changes, an excellent resource is the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s blog. EFF is a non-profit organization which is devoted to protecting your digital rights. You can find links to many of their updates in the reference section.”
Keely Kolmes’ guiding articles can be found on her website. The entire list with links can be found at this page on her website “Articles for Clinicians Using Social Media” at this link: http://drkkolmes.com/clinician-articles/ .
I have searched around for other Psychotherapists’/mental health practitioners’ Social Media guidelines. Institutions such as hospitals and healthcare systems are different, and although they are very professional, with great content and excellent marketing techniques, their guidelines for Engagement on Social Media are different.
Try Pinterest
For another positive social media strategy, consider Pinterest. It’s easy and fun, and FULL of prospects in the practitioner’s target market. Members are very active on Pinterest, and a high % of them click through to websites. Take a look at this amazing Board – 75k+ pins on positivity and inspiration!!!! Great for tweeting and reposting – carefully selected to create good feelings and share-ability.
Summary Thoughts
So, in summary, licensed mental health practitioners’ social media strategies are safely content-driven, with the objective of building a strong hub-and-spoke system (website = hub) to increase SEO and getting found by prospective clients. When the posted content is more valuable, engaging and sharable than their competitors’, then it will be widely shared and thus it will increase awareness and client conversions.
BONUS TIPS:
1. Promote your psychotherapy private practice online:
If you want more guidance on integrating the digital world into your practice marketing, see this book:
If you finished reading this post and you think it’s valuable, others will too, so take 5 seconds (!) to share on Facebook, Twitter or your favorite social scoop. Thanks!
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Marketing and Social Media.
.. _____ ..
ABOUT Lisa M. Chapman:
Lisa Chapman helps company leaders define, plan and achieve their goals – both online and offline. After 25+ years as an entrepreneur, she is now a business and marketing consultant, business planning consultant and social media consultant. Online, she works with clients to establish and enhance their brand, attract their Target Audience, engage them in meaningful social media conversations, and convert them into Buyers. You can reach her via email: Lisa (at) LisaChapman (dot) com. Her book, The WebPowered Entrepreneur – A Step-by-Step Guide is available at:
How do reputation-related issues affect the bottom line?
Reputation is a major factor in your market performance. To illustrate that fact, and to demonstrate just how much of a market shift various crises create, Freshfields Bruckhaus published the chart below, featuring the findings of a survey polling over 100 PR pros:
——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-
A recent email asked: “What is a reasonable goal to ask a development person to raise for a non-profit organization?
“Our Executive Director, a former college president, expects me to raise 6 to 8 times my salary in new money, which was the expectation at the college.
“Have you heard of that concept before? I’ve been a Director of Development for a few organizations in the past and never heard of this!!”
Almost always, when I learn of the impossible situations in which too many good development officers find themselves, I reply in ways intended to ease the pain as best I can and, when I can, offer soothing and workable ways to help them change the minds of their bosses.
This is not, however, one of those instances. What this development officer is experiencing not only troubles me, but it makes me angry to see once again the gross short-sightedness of a supervising official at a non-profit seeking to impose the impossible.
Now, I will calm down (only a bit) and tell you what I told this harried development officer.
First, there is not, nor could there be, any reasonable expectation of someone raising new money based on x-times her or his salary.
That expectation – edict – is based totally on ignorance regarding how money is raised for most nonprofit organizations.
Unfortunately, I have heard of such numbers before. Different numbers, at different times, because they are almost always made up by people who know no better.
Even more to the point of such an expectation being totally unfounded, is the fact that the development office is to be “the” fund-raiser, either mainly, or solely. That is even worse, regardless the way any goal is set – even a legitimate goal.
Any boss telling the development officer that she or he must work to such an 8 to 10-times-money-raised number, as it is relates to the development officer’s salary, needs to tell everyone else why and how they came up with that meaningless formula.
For that matter, why ten times? Why not fifteen, or twenty, or five? You get the idea. There is no sense or order to such a ratio. And how could there be justification further to throw out an 8-10 salary-X range, where the difference could be huge in the amount ordered to be raise.
Think of it. Let’s just say that being paid $50,000 for the year means that the development officer is required to personally raise $500,000. And this is to be “new” money.
From where will this money come?
The boss can make up a goal such as this one, but the boss cannot create prospects from phantoms. And, with the rush and crush to raise “new” money to meet the so-called goal, you can bet that some of the “old” (previous contributions) money would not be pursued with the same vigor. And, certainly, there would be little-or-no time to emplace a cultivation process to provide for future fundraising.
Even so, what if the institution needed more than that particular salary-Xs amount to balance the books and meet its fund-raising goals? Would the institution then expect the development officer to raise say, 15 times the salary?
Suppose, on the other hand, the institution could forecast that it would be in position to balance its annual operational budget, thus able to meet a fund-raising goal with less than the previously-set salary-Xs formula. Would the ratio then be dropped accordingly? I don’t think so.
Therefore, when I am asked the “how-many-times” question for funds to be raised based on a salary figure, as related to what is average, standard, or likely, I reply that everyone involved must consider the extraordinarily wide range of non-profits’ actual money needs, the respective contribution potential possible to them, the means and resources available to raise the money, the experience and skills of the development officer – and a good measure of luck.
When any institution’s leadership tells the development officer that she or he must raise an amount of money based on a salary-multiple factor, I would like to be there and ask that particular supervisor how and why such a number is presented. There could not be a good answer.
As previously noted in this blog, fundraising is performed based on a plan derived from reality – not at the ignorant whim of an executive director or board member.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a question or comment about the above posting?
Send an email to Comments to offer your thoughts. Your comments, with appropriate attribution, could be the basis of a new posting.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Have you seen The Fundraising Series of ebooks?
They’re easy to read, to the point, and inexpensive ($1.99 – $4.99)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
I’ve collaborated with Dr. Crystal Davis for the past two years. It’s been a nice creative process. I first met Crystal while she was working on her Ph.D. She had read my book “Path for Greatness: Work as Spiritual Service” and wanted to include it as a piece of her dissertation work.
Here’s a post she wrote recently related to her dissertation on Servant Leadership.
Servant Leadership and Compassionate Collaboration (Pillar IV)
“None of us is perfect by ourselves”
~Robert Greenleaf
A Servant-Leader builds relationships, embraces diversity and is the creator of a culture of collaboration. Pillar IV is the Servant Leader as Compassionate Collaborator. A Servant-Leader who compassionately collaborates;
Invites and rewards the contribution of others.
Is always mindful and aware of the quality of work-life balance and continually builds caring, supportive, and collaborative teams and communities.
Develops a positive rapport with diverse people, acknowledge cultural difference, and values a variety of backgrounds.
Neutralizes disagreements respectfully, diplomatically, and constructively.
Three core competencies of a Servant-Leader who is a compassionate collaborator;
Expresses Appreciation
Builds Teams and Communities
Negotiates Conflict
Together
Everyone
Achieves
More
Servant-Leaders develop a culture of collaboration. This type of culture takes time to build, but a Servant Leader knows it is the way to harmony (as it is seen in Japanese cultures) and the success of an organization or project. A collaborative culture includes:
Trust and respect in everyday situations,
Equalitarian attitudes among members at all ranks,
Power based on expertise and accountability,
Shared leadership where all members take initiative,
Commitment to the success of other members, rather than just one’s own success,
Valuing the truth and truth-telling,
Commitment to continuous improvement of the whole organization,
Active learning, and
Personal responsibility.
Building a culture of collaboration is worth the work. As a Servant-Leader strives to reach consensus about doing the right thing, one comes to understand quickly, that the right thing may be different for the customer, the manager, or the boss. To engage in consensus decision-making, a Servant-Leader understands that while everyone may not agree with the ultimate decision, that everyone is going to support the decision and not undermine it. At the end of the day, the Servant-Leader who has engaged in compassionate collaboration is one that when everyone who leaves the room claiming “we” made the decision and not just the leader.
One of the three competencies of a compassionate collaboration is expressing appreciation. Five tips that Servant-Leaders engage when praising people include:
Praise with a Purpose
Understand the difference between a compliment and praise that reinforces positive performance. For example, telling Jane you like her new glasses is a compliment. Telling Jane you appreciate her contribution to helping the organization stay organized and on time is effective praise.
Be Specific
“Good job, Way to Go!” is a good way to show appreciation but what’s even better is saying, “What an impressive procedure you developed for handling customer service conflicts on the telephone.” Be brief and precise.
Consider the Receiver
It helps to be aware generation-sensitive language (You wouldn’t want to say “good job dude” to a person that is seen as an elder) and to be aware of personalities and feelings of the receiver of your recognition. John might prefer a quiet hallway conversation while Sally might appreciate a banner or balloons. Know your people!
Be Sincere
Be authentic, heartfelt, and proportionate. People can sense phoniness and brown-nosing a mile away.
Do It Often
Celebrate small successes – frequently, consistently, and conscientiously. It is good business, and it is one way a Servant-Leader acts on her commitment to the growth of others.
Crislip and Larson, in their book, Collaborative Leadership put it this way;
“The purpose of collaboration is to create a shared vision and joint strategies to address concerns that go beyond the purview of any particular party.”
Servant Leaders understand that the growth of self and others is interrelated with compassionate collaboration. Without it, failure is inevitable.
Crystal J Davis is a servant leader, blogger, and researcher. She holds a Doctorate in Management specializing in Organizational Leadership.Dr. Davis is passionately engaged in Servant Leadership and selfless service to the nonprofit and public sectors having served both large and small organizations throughout her career and her consulting business.
An infographic to help you determine the ideal response to negativity on the ‘net
Every organization will face reputation threats these days, but how much it impacts yours will be determined by your reaction. While practice and training will help you determine the ideal response, the Chatterbox infographic below will give you a solid start:
——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-
We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies and process personal data. This includes unique identifiers and standard information sent by a device for personalized ads and content, ad and content measurement, and audience insights.
With your permission, we and our partners may use precise geolocation data and identification through device scanning. You may click to consent to our processing as described above. Alternatively, you may click to refuse to consent or access more detailed information. You may also change your preferences before consenting.
Please note that some processing of your personal data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such processing. Your preferences will apply to this website only. You can change your preferences at any time by returning to this site or by visiting our privacy policy.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
I’m okay with functional and analytical cookies for website functionality. I agree to the use of cookies under these circumstances:
Will be used if you visit Managementhelp.org
Are necessary for the proper functioning of the website
Enable you to use the site securely
Do not collect personal information that’s not needed for personalization
Help us detect any bugs and improve our website
Collect anonymous information about your visits to our website
Are never used for remarketing
I’m okay with the functional and analytical cookies for marketing purposes and not for website functionality.
Are used to monitor the performance of marketing campaigns
Enable us to compare performance across our marketing campaigns
Are used for individual targeting
Can be used for retargeting on other partner platforms
Enable a more personalized experience
