The Scholarly Kitchen has served up an interesting article for libraries this morning. In, Tackling the Data-Driven Funding Challenge — a New Skill for Nonprofit Managers, Alix Vance reviews initiatives to address one of the key challenges for libraries and other nonprofit organizations:
When it comes to fundraising and donors, it’s no longer enough for non-profit organizations to talk about the relative value of their mission, activities, and results. Funders are comparison-shopping, and they want to know that their gifts will deliver more bang-for-the-buck if contributed to one organization versus another.
Her first reference, a working paper from Harvard Business School, articulates an aspect of the dilemma quite well:
[The] literature points to two basic tensions confronting nonprofit managers. First, nonprofits that focus on measuring results at the front end of the logic chain (inputs and outputs) risk being seen as failing to be accountable, failing to convince funders and citizens that they are making a difference. Those that do try to demonstrate broader societal outcomes and impacts risk overreaching by taking credit for social changes beyond their actual control.
In libraryland, one side of the tension plays out in the manual tracking of questions received at the service desk, gate counts, library cards issued and other discrete activity measures. On the other are unverifiable claims such as libraries’ preservation of democracy or putting people back to work during the current recession.
Like it or not, public libraries are positioned more like nonprofits than governmental agencies and will likely need to increase their reliance on donated resources. Alix Vance concludes “measures of impact offer significant competitive advantages in marketing and fundraising — and can give major advantages to organizations that crack the code.” Large nonprofits are equipped to work on the challenge. Can the same be said for libraries?
