Category Archives: The Network Building Field

Investing in Networks , The Network Building Field

Proliferation of Network Building

Peter Plastrik

“There’s something happening here…”

When Madeleine Taylor and I started to study social-impact networks about 10 years ago it wasn’t easy to find very many of them. Over the years, as we wrote about and consulted with start-ups, we (along with coauthor John Cleveland) gradually connected with some 30 or so networks, and used what we learned from them to develop the frameworks and advice in Connecting to Change the World. That seemed like a pretty good sample size, and many other networks, such as those using a “collective impact” approach, were also emerging.

What was a trickle is becoming a proliferation. In just the past year, I’ve had some involvement with 9 more social-impact networks, most of which didn’t exist when we wrote Connecting . They are tackling a diversity of complex problems/opportunities:

  • reducing carbon emissions in cities;
  • making cities safer for pedestrians and drivers;
  • getting water utilities in the U.S. West to adopt sustainability practices;
  • helping commercial property owners in central cities reduce their buildings’ consumption of energy and water;
  • supporting innovation in America’s post-secondary education institutions;
  • reinventing public libraries so they serve as “engines” for community development;
  • spreading the idea of a “two generation” approach to human services for low-income families;
  • and more.

And almost every one of these networks has been able to line up sufficient start-up or continuing funding from foundations and other sources.

It’s still a relatively small sample size, not an exhaustive accounting of network building. And some who have watched funders closely might wonder if this isn’t just the latest fad rippling through philanthropy.

What’s clear from being in touch with the people building and funding these networks is that they are convinced that building networks is a new and potentially useful path to having the kind of impact they can’t get any other way.

Of course a proliferation is not a proof. It’s a step on the way: first a concept, then experimentation, then proliferation. Next comes determining best practice–what really works under what conditions.

Investing in Networks , Network Case Study , The Network Building Field

Investing in Networks Grows Funder’s Impact

Madeleine Taylor

In a blog for Stanford Social Innovation Review , Madeleine Taylor uses the case of the RE-AMP network to examine how participation in a network allows foundations to leverage their individual investment by surfacing multiple, ongoing opportunities for collaborative grant making.

W hile still an emergent grantmaking strategy, more foundations are investing in network building as an effective tool for achieving their goals and leveraging their dollars. Even so, network investing is not for the faint of heart. Foundations must consider the scope of resources required to initiate a network approach, and support the infrastructure and collaborative projects needed to produce results. Yet we see cases where foundations with modest corpuses have leveraged their charitable dollars many times over by engaging other funders as network partners, significantly increasing the pool of funding for a change initiative over time.

The team at Network Impact is interested in understanding the resource benefits and other kinds of value created through a network approach to network funding. To that end, the Garfield Foundation —a mid-sized philanthropy—kindly offered to share financial data related to its 10-plus year investment in RE-AMP .

Read the blog.

Network Evaluation , The Network Building Field

Network Evolution Assessment

Peter Plastrik

When Maggie Ullman was asked to assess the condition of eight regional networks of city government sustainability directors around the U.S., we designed an assessment framework that would allow her to map each network’s evolution and also put the networks side by side to form a composite picture of their condition. The assessment, based on interviews, survey data, observations, and written materials, has two axes:

  1. Stages of Evolution –from Emerging to Developing to Near Mature to Mature.
  2. Network Conditions –Connectivity, Leadership, Activities, Communications, Coordination, Member Satisfaction, and Resources.

In each Stage the specifics of each Condition are different, they evolve, as can be seen in the matrix below. Note that the specific “rubric” in each cell is somewhat tailored to the type of networks that were being assessed–but you can adjust these for your own use.

NETWORK ASSESSMENT
STAGE Connectivity Leadership Activity Communication Coordination Member Satisfaction Resources
Emerging Small hub of 3-5 connected members Two or more committed founders Members connect and exchange information Face to face meetings with no communications between meetings Ad hoc capacity by small group of member volunteers Most members see opportunity but network not yet delivering No and/or in-kind resources for network activities
Developing Larger hub of 6-10 strongly connected members Established steering committee (SC) of 3-5 members Members align and spread shared ideas such as policy or project needs Informal communication between face to face meetings between some members Coordination by member volunteers and minimal third party support Network beginning to deliver satisfaction for hub of group Minimal and/or in-kind resources for annual meeting or network coordination or collaborations
Near Mature Multiple hubs of strongly connected members SC of 6+ members who create annual strategic plans Members collaboration on their first project Formal network wide communication between face to face meetings Coordination by third party Network delivering satisfaction for most members Resources for annual meeting, network coordination, and member collaborations
Mature Multiple hubs that intertwine of 20+ strongly connected Second generation of SC leaders who create annual strategic plans Members collaborate and produce outcomes on multiple projects Multiple, network wide communications between face to face meetings with high member participation Consistent, effective coordination by third party Broad, high level of member satisfaction by a majority of the members Consistent resources for annual meeting, network coordination, and member collaborations

Investing in Networks , The Network Building Field

Investing Strategically in Generative Networks (1)

Peter Plastrik

First in a series

We’re often asked by funders and network builders whether investing in a generative network, instead of any of the other models for collective action–coalitions, associations, movements, for example–will best fit with their goals and strategies. How can they know?

With support from the Kresge Foundation we’ve been developing some strategic guidance for funders, based in part on real-world analysis we’re doing for Kresge in analyzing the potential of networks in the field of urban resilience. By drawing on this work-in-progress, we’re putting together a series of blogs that focus on particular aspects of investing strategically in generative networks. In this blog we briefly preview a key framework that we’ll fill in with subsequent blogs.

A funder’s judgment about whether or not to invest in a generative network approach depends on a blend of conditions:

  • The funder’s goal is system change .
  • The funder is simultaneously pursuing multiple challenging strategies for achieving system change.
  • The system’s situation involves a great deal of uncertainty , and solutions are not known.
The Network Building Field

Going Together — Page by Page

Peter Plastrik

I heard the African proverb again at a retreat held by a team building a national network: “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” I say “again” because we put those words right at the front of our book as a signal about what the point of connecting and collaborating is: to go far, because that’s what it takes to change the world in big ways.

But how does a book help people to go together? We can have thousands of readers, but they are individuals, reading solo. Except, it turns out, when they’re not.

In 2005 Malcolm Gladwell wrote “The Cellular Church,” an article about the phenomenal growth of Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church and the record-breaking sales of Warren’s book, The Purpose-Driven Life. At the time, the book had sold 23 million copies , making it one of the best selling nonfiction hardcover books in American history. That was impressive, of course, but what Gladwell described next caught my attention: “The Purpose-Driven Life is meant to be read in groups… The book is supposed to be supplemented by a layer of discussion and reflection and debate… This is precisely how The Purpose-Driven Life has been used. It spread along the network that [Warren] has spent his career putting together, not from person to person, but from group to group.”

How cool–not just as a way of generating more sales, but as a way of generating impact. I even bought The Purpose-Driven Life to learn more about what a book for group use looks like.

My coauthors and I are in networks of hundreds of people who care about the “network way of working” and want to learn more about it and help others learn about it. And we’ve tapped those networks as part of a voluntary marketing force.

But until a few days ago, I hadn’t thought much about a group dynamic happening around the book. Then a photo arrived in my e-mail, from Lynn Decker who manages The Fire Learning Network, which we had written about.

Annual meeting of the Fire Adapted Communities Learning Network
Annual meeting of the Fire Adapted Communities Learning Network

It’s just a picture of tables in a conference room, and the participants are on a break. But scattered about are copies of Connecting. “ Everyone read the book ahead of time for similar grounding to start,” Lynn explained. “ Everyone here responded by wanting to talk more about different network membership in a relatively new and evolving network… Lots of energetic and curious new leaders.” Perfect.

Then I recalled another e-mail, this one in December” from Cori Burbach, a member of the Urban Sustainability Directors Network, also written about in the book. “W hen you see a spike in your book sales this week,” she wrote, “it’s because everyone in Dubuque is reading it!  Our community foundation just bought a copy for the entire Inclusive Dubuque committee, and I literally saw a box with about 40 of them get handed out in a matter of minutes!  I even saw someone post a selfie reading it the other day.”

Then this e-mail from co-author Madeleine Taylor: “ I just came from a community foundation in Wisconsin where several copies are on the shelf and staff members are reading it.”

When I mentioned these e-mails to our publisher, David Miller at Island Press, he suggested we write and send around a short guide for how a group can use Connecting. Good idea. Maybe it’ll start with this suggestion: “Form a group and read the book out loud.”

Investing in Networks , Network Development , The Network Building Field

Collaboration? Grantmakers Love It, But Most Don’t Fund It

Peter Plastrik

Most grantmakers believe it’s important for funders to coordinate funding and actions with each other, but when it comes to supporting collaborations by their grantees a majority of funders acknowledge that they never or rarely do. That’s the conclusion from a new study of funders by Grantmakers for Effective Organizations (GEO). For several years GEO has promoted the idea that funders can use collaborations of nonprofit organizations–networks, in particular–to achieve greater impact.

In chapter 2 of Connecting to Change the World: Harnessing the Power of Networks for Social Impact , we describe some of the reasons that funders are wary of investing in networks even if they are intrigued by the idea. For instance, they may wonder precisely how a network will get anything done, who in a network can be held accountable for results, and how to evaluate a network’s performance. As some grant makers have grown comfortable with investing in networks, they have supported the development of tools for other funders, such as a framework for evaluating networks produced by the Center for Evaluation Innovation and Network Impact .

But it’s also up to network builders to help potential funders understand more about the case for investing in networks and how to overcome reasonable concerns. In chapter 2, we offer several tips for doing this in addition to providing a brief scan of revenue sources for networks:

  • Pitch the potential impacts of your network, not just its network-building processes.
  • Anticipate funders’ many questions about networks–and be ready to answer them.
  • Show funders the value of the network members’ voluntary effort.
The Network Building Field

We Are What You Read. Here’s What Our Readers are Reading

Peter Plastrik

One of the challenges of marketing a book about building networks for social impact is that its topic doesn’t fall neatly into a familiar niche.

Amazon categorizes our book as ” Nonprofit Organizations & Charities ,” which it sort of is and isn’t. When our publisher asked which conferences we might speak at we said there weren’t any that brought together network-building professionals. Yes, a funders conference might consider having a workshop on the topic, or a conference on some issue of the day (poverty, education), might want a workshop on how networks can be used. But network building itself–forget it. Only a few foundations–Packard and Barr, most prominently–have invested resources in developing knowledge and capacity for the emerging network-building field. Many others have  funded networks, but only to get something done, not to boost the practice of network building.

To help figure out our marketing niche, I keep an eye on which books Amazon says our book’s buyers have also bought. Early on, this information was confusing: a book about wild animals.  But more recently, things have settled into a more likely pattern. Books our customers bought include:

  • The Surprising Power of Liberating Structures
  • Reinventing Organizations
  • Leading from the Emerging Future
  • Moments of Impact: How to Design Strategic Conversations that Accelerate Change
  • The Networked Nonprofit
  • The Collapse of Western Civilization (a staple on any list)

Change. Reinvention. Strategy. Emergence. You might conclude from this list of affinities that Amazon’s data analysis is spot on. There really is a reader niche! Even one of the two non-book items that appeared–a Post-It self-stick easel pad–makes some sense. But what about the other non-book item? It’s Amy’s Organic Lentil Vegetable Low Salt Soup, 14.5 Ounce Cans (Pack of 6).

Food–now that would be a great market niche to tap!