The Global Open Challenge is GlobalGiving’s powerful idea of using the “wisdom of the crowd” to identify organizations worthy of being part of the GlobalGiving charitable giving community. Organizations that pass a rigorous due diligence process are given an opportunity to pitch a project in a month-long Global Open Challenge along with a cohort of other organizations. Those that secure over $4,000 from more than 50 people are “in” and can continue to use GlobalGiving for online fundraising. This is quite a trial of fire which takes immense courage and effort to win – I know this from experience, having won the Global Open Challenge on behalf of Kabissa last August, raising $5,085 from 85 donors that month.
As a Global Open Challenge survivor, I have of late been having trouble averting my eyes from the bottom of the Global Open Challenge Leaderboard, feeling embarrassment and sympathy for the dozens of projects that are unable to get support – many of them entering the challenge not for the first time. I am constantly reminded of their lack of progress via frequent, increasingly desperate pleas by email, Facebook and Twitter. My heart sinks every time I check. Even now I see three projects I am supporting with only 2-3 donations each, including mine. Right at the bottom of the Leaderboard.
Maybe I’m crazy, but to me the feeling is not dissimilar to what it feels like to approach the scene of an accident. Already from afar you see the flashing lights of the emergency vehicles, and as traffic inches forward it seems time has stood still and you can’t wait to get past it. Yet you also eagerly await your turn to pass the accident so you too can slow down to take in what happened. Afterwards you feel gratitude that it did not happen to you.
It might be hard to witness, but GlobalGiving’s process is effective. They are very successful in “surfacing” great organizations and getting them much needed support. Speaking from my personal experience, I even think Global Giving makes participating organizations better by giving them incentive and tools to be more accountable to their donors.
GlobalGiving donors are partners, not a cash machine, which is win-win all around. But it’s still painful to watch.
Tomorrow: advice for organizations at the bottom of the Global Open Challenge Leaderboard.
[...] -saidia { English: help } Posts by Tobias Eigen Skip to content HomePhotosAboutContact ← Watching the Bottom of the Global Open Challenge Leaderboard [...]
GlobalGiving’s mission is to provide a platform that is open to anyone. Over the years we’ve experimented with a number of different strategies to figure out how to vet and determine which organizations are the best fit for our site. As you note, no one is a cash machine in this. Just posting a project on GlobalGiving won’t (usually) get you a ton of donations out of thin air. What we provide are the tools and training to help you engage your supporters and a set goal to reach to help you engage them. Over time, this investment will help you raise more funds from more donors on our platform, including new donors that we can help bring to you.
The Open is result of 10 years of experimentation and iteration as to what works not only to find strong projects but also to provide a means to support these projects. We’ve raised more money for new projects through Opens than through any other means. We’ve set these goals to be aggressive but achievable, and we’re finding that each time more and more organizations achieve them.
Some of the projects on the leaderboard are return participants. I’m pleased to say that while some returning projects are having trouble, others have taken time to read our self-help, attend trainings, and are now succeeding in this Open. For the ones still on the bottom, we hope that they will be able to engage their supporters this time around. If not, we’ll continue to provide training and support and when appropriate, give them another chance in a future open.
We are your partner in this. We want to help you succeed. We want to help each project realize that their donors are also their partners, not cash machines. And that everyone involved wants to help everyone else involved become BETTER as a result of this.
I love you follow up post with advice and encourage any struggling organizations to read it.
– Kevin Conroy, GlobalGiving
Tobias -
It’s not a pleasant sight for me to watch the bottom 50% of every leaderboard either. But there are other, brighter angles from which to see the phenomenon:
1. We’ve done something like 18 open challenges since 2008. The % of orgs with no donations at the end has never changed (from 55-65%). It’s probably a hard-wired fact of human nature.
Why? Because I’ve talked to the folks at NANOWRIMO.ORG (my all time favorite organization as a “beneficiary”). Their analytics gal finds the same thing! The percentage of writers that are “losers” each year – in the sense they promise to write a book in one month and fail to write a single word – is about the same as orgs that try to get their first donation. Setting intentions is like that. (Especially astounding when any of these orgs could give themselves one donation to move into the top 50%, and anyone can log just 1 word in nanowrimo – but they don’t!)
2. I’m amazed as I travel East Africa at the number of people from organizations that never even make it into an open challenge, that remain dedicated and committed to one day “winning.” And I’ve met plenty that believe they have put in 3 hours a day for 2 weeks in a challenge and gotten nothing. They remain positive, but also baffled by their lack of success.
It invariably turns out that “putting in the hours” during the challenge isn’t the same as simply asking friends “how have you been?” when they aren’t trying to cash-in, so to speak. Building relationships (and trust) is a 365-days a year activity. We need NGOs run by people who take the time to think about friends all year long. The surprise successes I’ve met are people who have a knack for caring about others and showing it – not just caring about the “cause” of whatever the NGO is trying to do.
3. As a teacher and a scientist, I believe that feedback is learning. Failing a test teaches you more. We are all better off struggling from time to time. Tough (behavior change) lessons come only through meeting challenges.
Thanks for the thoughtful replies, Kevin and Marc. I appreciate it. I don’t think you are telling me something I don’t already know about GlobalGiving, but it’s good to see it articulated again and I do feel a little better now about my friends failing in the Open. There’s always next time, and in time the cream will rise to the top.
I do enjoy and find comfort in seeing, in the same place, evidence of both the nurturing partnership approach of GlobalGiving’s support team and the (perhaps colder) scientific approach at the backend guiding your strategy. It works for me.
Another thing that I like is your open approach – both that you’re willing to talk about your strategy in a blog post like this and that you’re willing to give everyone a chance to try to get their donations through an open platform (and open leaderboard), even if it means showing a long list of failing campaigns. It takes guts to do that to people, especially lovely people who are trying to change the world through charitable projects.
Marc, I was blown away by this point – food for thought for anyone considering joining a GG Open Challenge or any online fundraising campaign for that matter:
Which is why I always donate to my own projects right away, as well as to other projects I like. I keep a budget set aside for this.