<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Like Matt and Emma, I have built more than a few sites and toolsets for
un/underfunded organizations that I care about or am involved with on a
volunteer basis, only to see them collect cobwebs or get mothballed.
Discouraging doesn't begin to describe it. (I once did a pro bono site
with a couple of tiers of permissioned users such for controlled
contributions, editing, and administration, events management calendar,
blogs, full CiviCRM backend, and theme work. Then did training
sessions and offered to do more. Only for it to sit there for 2 years
and ultimately get replaced with a MS frontpage site that the director
felt more comfortable with.)<br>
<br>
I still do (too much!) volunteer work, but have learned a few tactics
that I now use:<br>
<ol>
<li>I state, upfront, that I'd be happy to build tools for others to
use, but that I won't be using these tools, others will have to. I
then repeat this over and over throughout the project. I can usually
get this across by asking "When would you like to get the training on
this?" or "Who am I going to train to do this?"<br>
</li>
<li>I try to get them to recognize that as a single volunteer that I
have strengths and weaknesses. I usually state that I'm a "cogs and
gears, under the hood" guy and am not strong in the graphic design
department (which is the truth, it's not a strong area of mine...) I
talk to them about going rates, firms and designers I know of who do
drupal themes, and realistic expectations about hiring someone to do
theme work and then try and get at least the initial theme work done
for hire. This does two things: A) Frees me from doing theme work :)
and B) Gets them to invest a little monetary buy-in to the project. Now
they have skin in the game to make this project succeed, but it isn't a
full tens of thousands of dollars price tag that they would have never
been able to afford. This one isn't always possible, but can be a good
indication of the amount of willingness they have to make the project
succeed out of the gates and whether this is something they need vs.
something that they'd just be willing to take for free if it was
offered.<br>
</li>
<li>Most important, I've found, is exactly what Matt said about using
an Agile approach. I do little bits at a time and say, "there you go,
that part is done and ready for you to start using". It becomes
apparent very quickly if the site/toolset is actually going to get used
or not and if it's worth it for me to invest any more of my unpaid free
time into the project.</li>
</ol>
<br>
Seth<br>
<br>
Matt Chapman wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTinHmj_dYzqnVQMW46sqlJrcVJFzdX4DZQCPfUsr@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Emma Irwin <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:emma.irwin@gmail.com"><emma.irwin@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">As a volunteer Drupal developer in my community, I often find that my
frustration is getting organizations to follow through on *their* role in
the process.
Everyone agrees ( in the beginning) how great it would be to update their
own content, it all sounds *wonderful* and everyone is in love . But, once
we get to the point where that's possible they still want help - they don't
have time...it's more work than they bargained for etc.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I've had the exact same experience more than once.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> but it's
almost made me want to *charge* something, as sometimes money means people
will follow through.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Charging "something" doesn't actually change the situation either,
because when you're working with an organization you care about, you
end up going above & beyond the financial agreement, and probably
charged below market rates to begin with, with the same end result as
above.
And I've also seen money-based relationships ruin non-profits because
of corruption or the evolution of a sense of entitlement to the funds.
I don't want to risk seeing myself become (or be percieved) that way,
so now I refuse to accept money for my labor from non-profits that I
am personally involved with; but because of the phenomenon that Emma
points out, that often means sub-par projects. It's a lose-lose
situation. (Full disclosure: I still have paying NPO clients; but they
came to me seeking paid services, without my prior involvement in
their work. They aren't in my community, and I don't use their
services myself.)
At this point, that really means the best I can do is serve as a
consultant, providing advice on who to hire or what services to use.
And I've even seen that fail, when the org uses some other volunteer
to lead the project, who then loses interest despite my support. Has
anyone else found a better solution to this dilemma?
Lastly, to avoid painting too bleak a picture, I've had just as many
wonderful relationships with NPOs and Volunteering. But I'd like to
see even fewer frustrations and failures. Any thoughts? The best I've
got is to try to adapt an Agile process to NPO work, where you give
them something minimally acceptable as quickly as possible, as see how
it goes. But you don't want to be stuck with an open-ended hours
arrangement when its volunteer or below-market work either. Argh....
All the Best,
Matt Chapman
Ninjitsu Web Development
--
The contents of this message should be assumed to be Confidential, and
may not be disclosed without permission of the sender.
_______________________________________________
consulting mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:consulting@drupal.org">consulting@drupal.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.drupal.org/mailman/listinfo/consulting">http://lists.drupal.org/mailman/listinfo/consulting</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>