digital technology and the voluntary sector: disruption, transformation and maturity | ncvo
TRANSCRIPT
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY AND THE VOLUNTARY SECTOR: DISRUPTION, TRANSFORMATION AND MATURITYGareth LloydVeronique JochumLisa Hornung March 2017
2
FOREWORD
In everything we do at Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), we recognise the power that technology has to empower people and make a positive impact.
We take every opportunity to encourage our customers and partners to embrace digital transformation, address the challenges facing businesses and society - to truly fulfil the opportunities of successfully implementing new technologies.
Ultimately, all our work is directed towards helping businesses, the public sector, as well as communities to adapt and take advantage of the digital economy. In order to do this we must consider a variety of areas: digital skills, diversity, data collection, privacy, analysis, and legacy IT systems to shift the overall mind-set of people and open their eyes to new digital solutions.
‘Digital Technology And The Voluntary Sector’, a report sponsored by TCS, demonstrates the impact technology has in overcoming barriers and enabling transformation in the voluntary sector, and outlines what considerations voluntary organisations must make in the technology adoption process.
The report also underscores TCS’ commitment to disrupting the status quo and collaboratively setting up new ways of thinking and working, allowing organisations to keep pace with the rapid technology advances we are experiencing.
Together, we can enter a new digital era that is more inclusive of – and more beneficial – for all.
Shankar Narayanan, Head of UK&I, Tata Consultancy Services
3
CONTENTS
OUR AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
OUR METHODS
LITERATURE AND DEFINITIONS
MAPPING TECHNOLOGIES TO CHALLENGES
TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION: CASE EXEMPLARS
DRIVERS, ENABLERS AND BARRIERS
TECHNOLOGICAL MATURITY
CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY
CONTEXT, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
5
CONTEXT
This was an independent research project undertaken by NCVO, sponsored by Tata Consultancy Services.
Our research was carried out in late 2016 and early 2017, consisting of a literature review, a workshop with digital experts working in the voluntary sector, a mapping exercise of 103 examples of digital technology adoption in the voluntary sector, and 20 more detailed exemplars.
Our focus was on adoption of technology by established voluntary organisations, rather than by smaller organisations that specifically work in the areas of digital change and technology.
6
RESEARCH AIMS
The research aimed to:
show how technology-led solutions can help address some of the challenges facing voluntary organisations.
give organisations a clear idea of what makes a successful technology-led solution and identify replicable solutions.
identify barriers and enablers so that organisations looking to implement technology-led solutions can deal with the former and make more of the latter.
7
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
1. Examine the transformative potential of digital technology.
2. Focus on the use and uptake of technology in relation to a number of specific challenges.
3. Focus on technology application and usage that has been transformative/disruptive but also replicable for other organisations with low barriers to uptake.
4. Explore the barriers and enablers to adopting, embedding and using technology within organisations.
OUR METHODS
9
METHODS
Activity Methods Purpose Informs
Literature review Review reports and guidance documents on technology in the voluntary sector to explore research questions.
Look at how organisations have used technology in projects, and how best to support these organisations.
DefinitionsDrivers, enabler and barriers
Mapping technology projects in the voluntary sector
Identify 100 technology-led projects from the voluntary sector that have addressed a number of specific challenges.
Provide evidence and guidelines on how organisations have addressed challenges with specific technology types in the past.
Drivers, enabler and barriersTechnological maturity
Identifying case exemplars Fit 20 individual projects to the mapping exercise and describe in more detail.
Help other organisations to ask whether a similar project might work for them.
Drivers, enabler and barriersTechnological maturity
Creating a digital maturity model Create method for fitting project types (and corresponding barriers, motivators and enablers) to the Gartner Hype Cycle.
Help us – and other organisations – to understand how barriers and enablers or technological uptake change as the technology itself matures and becomes commonplace.
Future work
LITERATURE AND DEFINITIONS
11
REVIEW MATERIALSThere are excellent and comprehensive overviews and reviews of the use of technology and digital in the voluntary sector, as well as guidance for organisations who want to use these technologies: we looked across these for themes, challenges and patterns.
12
DEFINITION - TRANSFORMATION
Transformation. Transformative uptake of technology is a process of organisational change, from an organisation that has minimal or limited of technology in their core business and/or day-to-day activities, to one that makes use of technology as part of their core work. Adopting technology may also involve other associated organisational changes required to enable that transition.
We recognise, however, the difference between compartmentalised and transformative uptake of technology:
compartmentalised uptake may involve the use of an external supplier to deliver a digitally-focused project, or even the deployment of a group of staff to do the same.
where specific projects do not translate to wider change in the organisation, we do not consider transformative change to have occurred.
13
DEFINITION - DISRUPTION I
Disruption. How can technology disrupt voluntary organisations, and how is disruption characterised in the relevant literature?
The initial review of materials revealed two distinct ways that the term ‘disruption’ was used.
• One was a broadly negative term for problems experienced during a period or process of change. • The other was more positive and related to innovation and disruption
of markets; in some cases, this was called disruptive innovation. This distinction is important because the term disruption alone may have
different meanings to different individuals from inside and outside the voluntary sector.
14
DEFINITION - DISRUPTION II
In many of the materials reviewed for this report, disruption was treated as either a negative by-product of change, or one that was to be tolerated and/or mitigated against.
Examples given included the need for staff members to train in and pick up the use of new technologies, thereby disrupting and changing their pattern of day-to-day activity. The materials reviewed highlighted this as an issue for established voluntary organisations, in that existing staff may feel uncomfortable with retraining to use new forms of technology and software.
Established organisations with only limited digital capacity might face disruption when transitioning to delivery of digital-focused projects: these organisations may be much more likely to experience disruption than other organisations with stronger digital infrastructure and capacity.
15
DEFINITION - DISRUPTION III
While it is, of course, possible for changes in day-to-day activities to be experienced in a beneficial or positive way, the materials reviewed tended to take the view that continuing with ‘business as usual’ was, in general, easier than changing day-to-day patterns in the short term.
Perhaps a more useful definition of disruption for the purposes of this report is in terms of the difficulties associated with breaking from established ways of working.
The more positive conceptualisation of disruption – disruptive innovation – is discussed in detail at the end of this section.
16
DISRUPTION AND TRANSFORMATION
Disruptive Non-disruptive
Transformative A successful implementation of technology/digital-led ways of working, but the process was difficult and disruptive for staff.
Example: a small, but mature charity (that has traditionally done all of its work in person and via paper-based systems) implements a digital financial, reporting and client relationship management system, requiring all staff to be trained in the new technology and use it in their day-to-day work.
A successful implementation of technology/digital-led ways of working, where staff did not feel that the process was challenging or difficult.
Example: a small, but mature charity runs a limited digital project with one team. This project is so successful and easy to use that it is quickly taken up by all members of staff.
Non-transformative A digital project that was either limited in scope or overly ambitious, that failed to change culture at the organisation but disrupted the day-to-day activity of staff. This is perhaps the most negative outcome possible from a digital technology project.
Example: a charity purchases various IT systems and trains staff to use them. However the systems are found to not be fit for purpose, and the costs and staff time expended are wasted as staff gravitate back towards use of non-digital methods.
A digital project that was either limited in scope or overly ambitious, that failed to change culture at the organisation but, at the same time, did not disrupt the day-to-day activity of staff. This may or may not be a poor outcome: it may simply represent a digital experiment or pilot that did not work out at planned.
Example: a charity trials the use of a low-budget, easy-to-implement piece of software for allowing staff to communicate with clients. It is not well liked or fit for purpose and is abandoned quickly, but with little disruption to staff who treat it as a learning experience.
Disruption may be a consequence of transformative change, though not necessarily an inevitable and direct one. Transformation and disruption can occur independently of one another, as illustrated by these hypothetical examples.
17
SIZE AND ACTIVITY OF ORGANISATION
There is little to suggest that how technology is adopted and implemented depends the activity of the organisation. The support and guidance provided for the voluntary sector is not tailored for different organisations doing different forms of work.
However, size of organisation appears to be important. Adoption and uptake of technology can be higher risk for large organisations.
Smaller organisations are often more able to embed technology-led projects in their day to day work and have fewer legacy systems.
18
DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION I
What about disruptive innovation? It’s difficult to avoid talking about disruptive innovation when talking about disruption and innovation, because it is such a popular and interesting concept, and has been identified as a driving factor behind recent funding programmes.
Disruptive innovation (as defined by Clayton Christensen) describes a new product or service that emerges at the bottom of a market and then becomes widespread, eventually displacing established competitors.
The term has been used when private sector markets have been changed rapidly by less-established competitors employing emerging technology: for example, AirBnB are often identified as disrupting the hotel industry.
19
DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION II
Two of the most notable examples of disruptive innovation are: • Wikipedia (which disrupted models of traditional print encyclopedias) and • digital photography (which disrupted traditional chemical-based cameras).
Widespread internet access (and the growing development and awareness of wikipedia) meant that people no longer needed physical access to an encyclopedia. The availability of affordable phones with an integrated camera meant that a complete photographic system was available to everyone who owned one. The key message in both examples is that the technology emerged at the lower end of the market in a way that opened up access to a greater range of users.
Christensen's definition is useful: "companies unwittingly open the door to ‘disruptive innovations’ at the bottom of the market. An innovation that is disruptive allows a whole new population of consumers at the bottom of a market access to a product or service that was historically only accessible to consumers with a lot of money or a lot of skill."
20
DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION III
There have been suggestions that voluntary sector organisations are 'ideal candidates' for disruptive innovation (such as Braden Kelly of Innovation Excellence). These commentators claim that voluntary sector organisations are often prescriptive and top-down about how they carry out their day-to-day work, and could benefit from disruptive innovation. But this is contested, and it is not clear whether they mean that individual organisations could benefit and improve via disruptive innovation, or that disruptive innovation could cause a more fundamental change to the way that the voluntary sector works.
The disruptive innovation model has influenced digital project funding in the voluntary sector. A number of funders have clearly attempted to foster and incubate the kind of innovation observed in other industries, but the resulting funded projects may not themselves be defined as disruptive innovation.
21
DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION IV
Our mapping exercise focused on the looking at transformative and disruptive change in established organisations rather than disruptive innovation. However disruptive innovation in the voluntary sector from external sources (for example, individuals and the private sector) is a prime topic for future research.
Disruptive innovation is different from the examples of disruption and transformation that we are concerned with, because we are looking at voluntary organisations that are seeking to transform their day-to-day operations via use of technology, rather than being disrupted by emerging technologies from the lower end of the market.
While disruptive innovation still deserves consideration, the transformative changes that we are considering in this research are usually internal, with organisations seeking to change their own practices. However, some organisations may also seek to disrupt the wider voluntary sector, for example in promoting changes in good practice.
MAPPING TECHNOLOGIES TO CHALLENGES
23
FOUR CHALLENGES FACING THE VOLUNTARY SECTOR
1 CONNECTING
2 SERVICE DELIVERY 3 LEADERSHIP &
GOVERNANCE
4 FUNDRAISING
How to unite communities and provide bridges between different sections of society
How to transform and deliver the public services that are needed by society in the context of less public money being available
How to develop effective and transparent governance and leadership, that inspires confidence and trust in how organisations behave and what they can achieve
How to raise money for charitable purposes in the most effective, cost-efficient, and ethical way
We defined four key challenges that the voluntary sector is facing.
24
MAPPING TECHNOLOGIES TO CHALLENGES
We identified 103 examples of projects that had been carried out by organisations in the voluntary sector that were based around the use of technology.
We organised these into 18 technology types, and mapped these to the four challenges.
We looked at a smaller subset of 20 individual example projects more closely (as shown in the appendices).
Finally we picked out some of these examples to describe in more depth and draw out comparisons.
Technology type Total
App 12Collaboration & Project Management software 2
Connected IT infrastructure 6
Contactless donation 5CRM 2Crowdfunding 6Data & Analytics 8Digital currency 2Digital donation 1E-learning 5Games 9Live support 6Messaging services 10Online platform/portals 5Online shops 3Social media 12Virtual reality 3Website 5Total 103
Challenges1 2 3 44 11 2 1
2
1 1 5 1
5
2 2
2 6
5 8 3
2
1
1 3 3
2 3 5
1 6
3 4 2 3
3 1 4 2
1 3
5 4 2 3
3
1 1 1 2
23 40 31 42
25
MAPPING TECHNOLOGY TYPES
Social media
Portals/ platforms
Website
IT infra-structure
Online shops
E-learning
Messaging
Data & Analytics
App
Crowdfunding
Contactless donations
Virtual reality
Digital currency
Online live support
Games
CRM
Collaboration/ PM software1 CONNECTING
2 SERVICE DELIVERY3 LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE
4 FUNDRAISING
Very few types sit under one challenge only.
The exceptions are fundraising-related types. This may reflect that fundraising has been a more pressing concern, and that more dedicated attention has been given to it.
Technology types that sit in the centre of the chart are those that address all types, and are more generic, well-used technologies; these tend to be used as a tool to address not only these challenges but a wide range of other outcomes and goals. For example, websites are generic forms of media.
26
MAPPING INDIVIDUAL EXAMPLES
1 CONNECTING
2 SERVICE DELIVERY3 LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE
4 FUNDRAISING
PETA (WhatsApp)Carers UK
(App)
Link Age (IT cloud)
Macmillan Cancer Support (Data & analytics)
National Ugly Mug (App)
NSPCC (Online Live
Support)
Forget me not children’s hospice
(App)
United Response(E-learning)
BACP (Board portal)
Childreach International(WhatsApp)
Blue Cross(Contactless donations)
Yorkshire Charity(Online auction portal)
RNLI (Bitcoin)
Depaul UK(Game)
Cafedirect Producers' Foundation(Digital currency)
RNLI (Game)
Charity:water(Donor portal)
Cancer Research UK(Crowdfunding)
Parkinson’s UK (Data & analytics)
WWF (Virtual reality)
Scope(Social media/ Storytelling)
We also plotted individual examples against the four challenges. These 20 examples were picked because they represented adoptions of technology by the voluntary sector that were potentially disruptive and/or transformative. They are described in more detail in the following slides.
Looking at these individual examples, we see more outside of the centre, suggesting that the examples identified serve more specific functions than the technology types we listed.
27
CASE EXEMPLARS
The following slides provide further information on the 20 examples that we have mapped out. They are useful in understanding what would make the technology they used suitable for wider adoption and replication.
These examples are listed in the following slides in a standardised format, describing the type of technology utilised and challenge that is addressed (via the coloured labels to the right of the exemplar title).
• They can be used as starting points for drawing out comparisons between technologies (as shown in slides 38 and 39) or between challenges/goals.
CONNECTING
SERVICE DELIVERY
LEADERSHIP & GOVERNANCE
FUNDRAISING3
4
1
2
28
National Ugly Mug2016 / APP
Reason Digital has helped to develop a smartphone app that sex workers can use to warn each other about violent clients nearby. The app is a collaboration between National Ugly Mugs (NUM) and Reason Digital. The former is a UK charity that collects descriptions of threatening individuals and then circulates them via email and SMS among sex workers (and the police). The app radically speeds up that sharing process.
The organisationAnnual income: £214,500 Sector: Health and careNational Ugly Mugs (NUM) is a pioneering, national organisation which provides greater access to justice and protection for sex workers who are often targeted by dangerous individuals but are frequently reluctant to report these incidents to the police.
1 2 NSPCC2016 / ONLINE LIVE SUPPORT & COMMUNITY
The NSPCC said Childline – which has been operating for 30 years – had primarily been viewed as a telephone helpline, but last year 71% of children who contacted the service did so online. The support offered by Childline today includes services such as one-to-one online chats with counsellors, email counselling and access to a community of young people on online message boards and social channels.
The organisationAnnual income: £128,912,000 Sector: ChildrenThe National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) is a charity campaigning and working in child protection in the United Kingdom and the Channel Islands.
1 2
29
2015 / ONLINE BOARD PORTAL
An online portal, used by the British Association for Counselling & Psychotherapy, enables their board members to more easily access relevant information. They now feel more supported and tuned in to their organisation. Training is offered to every board member and policies have been developed for iPad use. Training also covers data protection issues. Using the portal has also led to significant time and resource savings, e.g. hard copy board papers no longer need to be collated and circulated.
The organisationAnnual income: £7,827,901 Sector: Health and careThe British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy is a professional body representing counselling and psychotherapy. It provides education and training, and provides information on counselling and psychotherapy for the general public.
BACP 3 United Response2011 / E-LEARNING
United Response uses its e-learning modules to deliver underpinning knowledge, and for refresher training. To accommodate some individual preferences for face-to-face training, it has adopted a blended approach where, for example, initial training is done face-to-face, but then refreshers are delivered via e-learning. They have also been exploring the use of webinars, and intends to increase these as they are working well.
The organisationAnnual income: £77,200,000 Sector: Health and careUK charity providing personalised care and support to people with learning disabilities, mental or physical support needs allowing them to live their lives to the full.
3
30
Cafedirect Producers' Foundation2015 / DIGITAL CURRENCY
In 2015, the Cafédirect Producers' Foundation (CPF) launched a campaign named #OneBigTweet, asking people to donate twitter followers instead of cash. The idea was to grow the #OneBigTweet concept to such a size that it can be auctioned for charity. This will enable the business that wins the auction to reach a huge number of people as their #OneBigTweet is automatically retweeted from the accounts of supporters once only as a kind of giant Twitter mailshot.
4
The organisationAnnual income: £819,202 Sector: International developmentThe Cafédirect Producers’ Foundation (CPF) is a UK-registered charity who works with smallholder farmers and their organisations growing tea, coffee and cocoa across countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia.
Blue Cross2016 / CONTACTLESS DONATIONS
The Blue Cross created the world’s first team of canine fundraisers. By embedding contactless technology into specially-designed jackets, it enabled the public to donate by patting dogs during charity events. Their contactless devices accept donations of £2. The idea came from the charity’s PR agency, and the Blue Cross fundraising, marketing and communications team developed the concept. First trials were run in summer 2016.
4
The organisationAnnual income: £34,158,000 Sector: Animal welfareThe Blue Cross is an animal welfare charity. It rehomes unwanted and rescued animals and provides veterinary care for people who cannot afford private vets' fees.
31
Parkinson’s UKc2010 / DATA & ANALYTICS
Parkinson’s UK teamed up with Wood for Trees, who specialise in helping charities gain strategic insight into their databases, to improve their use of CRM data. By analysing their own data alongside information from other platforms, e.g. JustGiving, Parkinson’s was able to gain deeper insight into who their supporters are, who they associate with and what they do. This resulted in an enormous reengagement of 70,000 people, and a significant uplift in revenue.
The organisationAnnual income: £31,451,000 Sector: Health and careParkinson's UK is a Parkinson's research and support charity. It is the largest charity funder of research into Parkinson's in the UK, and offers support and information to people affected by Parkinson's, their families and carers
4 Yorkshire Charity2015 / ONLINE AUCTION PORTAL
The Yorkshire Charity worked with GiveSmart to offer an innovative technology twist on their traditional silent auction event. Each guest was able to browse and bid for auction items via a mobile and online bidding site, while they enjoyed the sights and sounds of the orient themed event. GiveSmart helped the Yorkshire Charity raise £17,000 through the silent auction, double what the organisation has raised before.
The organisationAnnual income: £118,914 Sector: Grant makingThe Yorkshire Charity is a grant giving organisation supporting local charities and individuals. It’s focusing on four main areas: Health and Human Services, Education, Civic and Community Programmes and the Arts.
4
32
RNLI2014 / BITCOIN
RNLI are the first major charity in the UK to experiment with a Bitcoin donation scheme. The idea was based on research into future trends and changes, and aimed to expose RNLI to new audiences. In the first 3 months there had been 140 donations, the largest were two separate donations of about £300 each. The average Bitcoin donation was around £10. When a certain amount is reached, RNLI converts Bitcoin into pounds to minimise transaction costs and reduce the exposure to the risk of price changes.
4
The organisationAnnual income: £191,334,622 Sector: Emergency and reliefThe Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) is the largest charity that saves lives at sea around the coasts of the UK, Ireland, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. They also provide training and education, particularly for young people.
WWF UK2016 / VIRTUAL REALITY
In January 2016, 5,000 shoppers in the Westfield shopping centres were transported to the tigers' forest habitat in Nepal. It was all part of WWF's Tiger Experience, a virtual reality experience designed to combat the public's negative perception of face-to-face fundraising. WWF attracted an average of 16 new donors a day during the Tiger Experience, a 50 per cent increase on the 11 it normally signs up in two weeks. But the average direct debit values remained static at about £7 a month.
The organisationAnnual income: £63,203,000 Sector: Wilderness preservationThe World Wide Fund for Nature is an international non-governmental organisation founded in 1961, working in the field of the wilderness preservation, and the reduction of humanity's footprint on the environment.
4
33
Scope2014 / STORYTELLING
Scope’s online community is a place where individuals with disabilities can share their thoughts and experiences, and the charity has made great use of this channel to tell stories in a way that really makes people listen. The charity declared 2014 as their most successful year yet for Scope’s film content, and they have recently celebrated the release of their 100th film. Their #EndTheAwkward series got over a million views on YouTube, and combines humour with a powerful underlying message.
The organisationAnnual income: £101,068,000 Sector: DisabilitiesScope is a disability charity working with disabled people and their families in England and Wales. It runs support services such as schools, a college, residential care, training, short breaks and runs a helpline providing information and advice on disability.
1 Depaul UK2010 / GAME
In 2010, Depaul UK launched a tamagotchi-style app (iHobo), which allowed people to care for a homeless youth for 3 days in real-time. Push notifications would remind them to secure food and shelter for the youth living on the street. Players could either ignore the notifications and watch his life spiral out of control as well as lose points, or could take care of the homeless youth and earn points. The iHobo campaign had 600,000 downloads raising awareness of homeless youth and earned over 3.8 million dollars.
The organisationAnnual income: £100,708,000 Sector: ChildrenDepaul UK is a youth homelessness charity and specialises in working in communities where poverty and long-term unemployment have resulted in generations of social exclusion and high rates of homelessness.
1 4
34
Cancer Research UK2009 / CROWDFUNDING
Cancer Research UK was the first charity to build its own crowdfunding platform ‘MyProjects,’ in 2009. The site looks similar to many other crowdfunding sites. There are the details of the projects, updates from the researchers, the tally of money raised. Supporters can choose to give money to the research that means the most to them, whether it’s childhood cancers, clinical trials or cancer nurses. Until 2014, the site has raised over £2million to help fund a wide range of research projects.
The organisationAnnual income: £634,808,043 Sector: Health and careCancer Research UK is a cancer research and awareness charity in the UK.
1 4Charity: waterDONOR PORTAL – DOLLARS TO PROJECTS
Dollars to Projects is a feature within the charity’s donor portal that tracks donations and links them to projects. The charity works with partners on the ground to collect data on the kind of water technology used, the population served, the cost per project, the GPS coordinates and photos. They use a custom-built Assignment Tool to match the money raised with the projects that were funded. They provide a Project Detail Report, which shows GPS coordinates, photos and other details within donor’s customised projects page.
The organisation (US based but now also in UK)Annual income: Sector: International developmentCharity: water is a non-profit organisation bringing clean and safe drinking water to people in developing countries.
1 3 4
35
Childreach International 1 3
2016 / WHATSAPP
Childreach International uses WhatsApp to link staff located in the UK, India, Nepal and Tanzania by sharing photos and vlogs from the organisation’s projects. Communications executive Lisa Boyles says “Staff now feel a closer and more immediate connection to our work around the world. They are able to ask questions to colleagues they would otherwise not get an opportunity to interact with. This is also helping to provide fresh and engaging content that can be repurposed for our social media and online platforms."
The organisationAnnual income: £2,200,000 Sector: International developmentChildreach aim to restore child-rights and empower children to create positive change through community based solutions, ensuring children have improved access to education, protection and healthcare.
PETA UK2016 / WHATSAPP
PETA started using WhatsApp to support email journeys, encouraging supporters to go vegan. Around 700 participants receive one message a day, with content such as recipes, advice on shopping for vegan products and information on nutrition. They also send participants a survey at the end of the month to ask them whether the messages had been useful and if they planned to stay vegan going forwards. "The response was overwhelmingly positive, with many people replying enthusiastically to our messages.”
The organisationAnnual income: £3,161,382 Sector: Animal welfareThe People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) Foundation is a UK-based charity dedicated to establishing and protecting the rights of all animals.
2 3
36
Carers UK2014 / APP
Carers UK has been researching caring technologies for many years and has found clear evidence that the challenges of ‘distance caring’ and ‘sandwich caring’ can be eased with technology. They decided to launch a new service to help connect people caring for a member of their family or a friend. The app Jointly combines group messaging with other useful features to help support and coordinate care. It enables multiple carers to share a calendar, task and medication lists and allows for group messaging.
The organisationAnnual income: £3,484,667 Sector: Health and careCarers UK is a national membership organisation for carers in the UK giving cares support and advice about caring.
1 2 3 Link Age Southwark2016 / CLOUD BASED IT INFRASTRUCTURE
Link Age turned to tt-exchange to access donated software, and decided to make use of Office 365, providing cloud-based licences of Microsoft Office Suite. This meant that no computer storage had to be taken, and all files could be found in one place, saving time to search through documents and databases. Logging new service users and matching them to suitable volunteers, a task which could previously have taken up to a week, could now be done in a matter of minutes.
The organisationAnnual income: £301,683 Sector: Health and careLink Age Southwark is a local charity providing volunteer support to isolated, older people in Southwark. They help older people stay connected with their communities, alleviating loneliness, and improving health and wellbeing.
1 2 3
37
Forget Me Not Children Hospice2015 / APP
The Forget Me Not Children's Hospice developed an app to make it easy for families to offer immediate feedback after a visit and to communicate any care related enquiries. The app is also used to hear families’ opinions on other care related issues, e.g. what they would like to see at future events, or other services that would be helpful to them. This app enables the organisation to constantly listen and respond to the changing children and family needs, and therefore to deliver a high quality service.
The organisationAnnual income: £3,152,792 Sector: Health and careThe Forget Me Not Children's Hospice supports children with life shortening conditions and their families across West Yorkshire. They support children and their families through their hospice at home service and at their hospice, Russell House, in Huddersfield.
2 3Macmillan Cancer Support2014 / DATA & ANALYTICS
The cancer charity has been analysing NHS data sets, including cancer registration and mortality, to create a desktop tool for commissioners to plan cancer care in advance in any area of the UK. The model developed by the charity's team of data scientists predicts how many people will be diagnosed with cancer, what types they will have, how many will die and what their needs will be in one to three years' time. Data can also be filtered by cancer type, health and social care trust and council area.
The organisationAnnual income: £230,211,000 Sector: Health and careMacmillan Cancer Support is one of the largest British charities and provides specialist health care, information and financial support to people affected by cancer.
2 3
38
RNLI2015-16 / GAME
The Beach Builder Challenge, using the interactive video game Minecraft to create and build virtual worlds, has been created by the RNLI to teach children about beach and water safety at a time when many young people will be visiting the coast during school summer holidays. In its first year, the Beach Builder Challenge was a huge success with more than 8,000 children participating from all over the world. It also proved successful in helping to reach a high number of children living in inland communities across the UK and Ireland.
The organisationAnnual income: £191,334,622 Sector: Emergency and reliefThe Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) is the largest charity that saves lives at sea around the coasts of the UK, Ireland, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. They also provide training and education, particularly for young people.
1 2
39
COMPARING EXEMPLARS: CARE COMMUNICATION APPS
Forget me Not Children’s HospiceThe Forget Me Not app allows families to leave feedback on the care received, as well as pass on care-related messages and enquiries. It allows FMN staff to respond more quickly to these enquiries, as well as to provide further information to families and distribute surveys about the level of survey that they provide.
Carers UKCarers UK’s aim was to help connect people caring for a member of their family or a friend. They developed an app for this purpose: called Jointly combines group messaging with other useful features to help support and coordinate care. It enables multiple carers to share a calendar, task and medication lists and allows for group messaging.
Both Forget Me Not and Carers UK have developed and launched apps to support and speed up how their beneficiaries communicate. Both are available for Android and iOS devices, but have different aims and target beneficiaries.
40
COMPARING EXEMPLARS: CARE COMMUNICATION APPS II
Carers UK/Jointly (CUK) Forget Me Not (FMN)
Developed by: Pivotell Dogma Creative Ltd
Price: £2.99 Free
Stated goals: To allow networks of carers to co-ordinate care via group messaging and sharing information
“Encouraging greater interaction with the families they support” via private messaging and feedback mechanisms between families and FMN staff
Transformative elements?
Provided ways for CUK clients to communicate that bypass the organisation
Encouraged more regular feedback mechanisms from client families
Disruptive elements? None reported; provided enhanced services for clients but few changes to way that CUK operated
Changed the way that FMN staff communicate with client families, both in terms of method and shorter timescales
41
CATEGORISING AND RATING EXAMPLES: EXERCISE
Identify suitable examples (either of those provided or from elsewhere) Assemble a working group Each member to rate each example from 1-5 on the following categories:
• Is the example innovative?• Was the example risky for the organisation carrying it out?• Did the example transform the organisation’s day to day work or activities?• Did the example affect the organisation’s impact on beneficiaries?• Is it replicable? How easy would it be to carry out at our organisation?
Discuss answers as a group: look at where these is agreement and disagreement on ratings, and why.
In assessing these examples, we devised a series of categories that can be used to rate and compare them. The exercise below outlines how organisations can use them to assess existing examples of technology adoption in order to use them in their own work.
DRIVERS, ENABLERS AND BARRIERS
43
DRIVERS, ENABLERS AND BARRIERS
Drivers, enablers and barriers are useful in considering whether the examples in the previous section are replicable in other organisations.
Drivers are the desired changes that underpin why organisations adopt technology. They can be external, with drivers of change coming from outside of the organisation; or internal, with an organisation seeking to develop or change its own systems and/or practices.
Enablers are the positive factors that help ensure that digital technology projects will achieve their goals.
Barriers represent obstacles to the implementation of digital technology projects.
44
DRIVERS I
Improving customer focus The reports did not identify user experience as a general theme, but it was raised in a number of case studies and recommendations. User experience refers to a series of design and research principles that aim to make digital systems easier to use by reducing barriers and challenges that users have when interacting with the system (whether via hardware, dedicated software or websites).
Improving efficiency Efficiency-related goals stated included improving team communications, faster publishing and uploading of content, delivering services via digital platforms, and better accessibility for people with disabilities.
45
DRIVERS II
Improving user experience In terms of customer focus, this translated to new systems of data monitoring, and reporting and using those data in marketing and communications. It involved working on user journeys and changing how they work with customers via use of CRM. The desired outcome of these changes was increased conversion rates in fundraising and campaigning.
New fundraising methods Many organisations expressed an interest in crowdfunding as a solution to the funding issues identified and discussed previously; however, as pointed out in the New Reality report, digital transformation is often approached as a core cost and therefore would not be easy to communicate as a crowdfunding campaign. Crowdfunding is more commonly used for products or service development, and may be better viewed as a mechanism for improving digital capability through individual projects.
46
ENABLERS I
Internal support Having adequate internal support, not only in terms of IT, but on other internal mechanisms that ease change such as HR and finances.
New fundraising methods This includes having enough material resources including funding and physical resources; it also includes staff time and the ‘mindsets’ of staff members to take up new ways of working. Not having these resources could also constitute a barrier.
Flexibility Focusing too much on the use of a certain technology can be dangerous, and mean that the technology itself does not fit the overall goal of the project. Being willing and able to iteratively devise a technology-led solution to a goal will have a better outcome: but the actual technology used may be very different to what was envisioned.
47
BARRIERS I
Leadership issues Leadership-related barriers to digital uptake were partly based around a lack of understanding around responsibility in leaders and senior staff, and a tendency for the process of transformation to be delegated to lower level staff members. Furthermore, trustees appeared to be detached from the process in many organisations, while the most prominent champions of digital uptake in the sector were more concerned with delivery than overall strategy.
Skills gaps Costs of training staff, along with unwillingness or uncomfortable feelings of staff members in picking up new technologies and ways of working were the main issues relating to skills. The literature also covered general skill deficits in data analysis and the difficulty of having to continually adapt to changes in technology.
48
BARRIERS II
Overreliance on external support Organisations surveyed in the literature talked about the issues associated with using external agencies or suppliers for digital support. Few had the capabilities for in house support. Both of these challenges were associated with higher costs.
No space to innovate There are certain conditions that promote innovation, and others that act as a barrier to it. In the literature, organisations mentioned the pre-requisites of being able to innovate and to experiment with digital processes. Innovation may need the right skills, hardware, software and funding; but maybe more important staff time, an appetite for change and a structured approach to research and development.
49
BARRIERS III
Lack of funding and investment A running theme throughout these challenges has been cost, and organisations reported difficulties in obtaining capacity-building funding for technological implementation and maintenance. Cost issues are compounded by a lack of confidence in the impact of spending on digital systems: organisations were, in general, unsure of the return that such spending would involve in the short or long term. Furthermore, there is a lack of confidence and knowledge about the sustainability of spending on digital: in some cases the maintenance and upkeep costs are unknown factors.
MATURITY IN TECHNOLOGIES
51
BARRIERS AND MATURITY
We have presented drivers, enablers and barriers: but can we go further and link these to types of technology? Is there a better way of understanding how these drivers, enablers and barriers are present in certain types of technology and not others?
In the following slides we will introduce Gartner’s Hype Cycle for technology, and suggest a way that voluntary organisations can use it to plan and implement digitally-focused projects.
What are Gartner Hype Cycles? “They provide a graphic representation of the maturity and adoption of technologies and applications, and how they are potentially relevant to solving real business problems and exploiting new opportunities.” (Gartner, 2017)
52time
expe
ctati
ons
GARTNER’S HYPE CYCLE FOR TECHNOLOGY
PEAK OF INFLATED EXPECTATIONS
TROUGH OF DISILLUSIONMENT
SLOPE OF ENLIGHTENMENT
PLATEAU OF PRODUCTIVITY
TRIGGER
Potential technology breakthrough: early proof-of-concept stories and media interest trigger publicity. Often no usable products and commercial viability is unproven.
Early publicity produces a number of
success stories and failures.
Interest wanes as experiments and
implementations fail to deliver. Producers of the technology shake
out or fail.
Second and third generation products
appear from technology providers. More
enterprises fund pilots; conservative companies
remain cautious.
Mainstream adoption starts to take off.
Criteria for assessing provider viability more
clearly defined and broad market
applicability and relevance are paying
off.
53
BARRIERS AND DIGITAL MATURITY
There is no single definitive hype cycle for technology: Gartner provide their own, but this is from a whole-industry perspective.
Individual sectors, organisations or even individuals may see the cycle in a very different way, and can draw up their own perspective of the cycle, in terms of either their own readiness or their own perceptions of their industry or sector.
To do this, they can either start off with an empty chart, or use the whole-industry cycle that Gartner provides as a starting point, and plot our own definitions of relevant technologies along the cycle.
The following chart shows an example devised for the voluntary sector.
54
HYPE CYCLE: ONE PERSPECTIVE OF THE VOLUNTARY SECTOR
PEAK OF INFLATED EXPECTATIONS
TROUGH OF DISILLUSIONMENT
SLOPE OF ENLIGHTENMENT
PLATEAU OF PRODUCTIVITY
TRIGGER
Games
CrowdfundingApps
Data & Analytics
Contactless donations
Virtual reality
Bitcoin
CRM
Connected IT infrastructure
Social media
Website
Online portals/ platforms
Online shops
Online live support
Storytelling
MessagingE-learning
time
expe
ctati
ons
Here’s an example of a hype cycle that we created of technological readiness in the voluntary sector. Others people working in the sector might have different views, and the cycle would also look different if we drew it up for our own organisation rather than the whole sector.
55
HYPE CYCLE: CHARACTERISTICS OF TECHNOLOGY TYPES
The chart also helps us to look at what technologies are ‘immature’, such as those that are based on new hardware or software developments, and which are ‘mature’, which have more generic applications. We can outline further characteristics of these two broad types.
+Buzz, hype and interest+Enthusiasm+May offer unique solutions to challenges+An opportunity to get ahead of competitors
- Specialised hardware- Bespoke systems- High cost- Specialised support only available- Few open source tools- Riskier and not well tested- Little community support- Unfriendly systems- Little consideration of User experience
+ Runs on generic hardware+ Generic systems+ Low cost or open source alternatives+ More open source tools and community support+ User friendly systems+ Mature UX+ Tried and tested
- May be perceived as ‘playing catch-up’ with competitors- Less external interest and enthusiasm
Characteristics of ‘immature’ technologies
Characteristics of ‘mature’ technologies
56
HYPE: BARRIERS, ENABLERS AND TECHNOLOGY TYPES
Greater reliance on external support More issues with legacy systems and
data Require stronger leadership to
implement Harder to implement More likely to expose skills gaps Require carving out more space to
implement
Barriers in ‘immature’ technologies Enablers in ‘mature’ technologies• Less reliance on external support
where community support available• Compatibility issues with with legacy
systems and data likely to have been solved
• More refined and easier implementation process, requiring less input from leadership and less staff time/space to implement
• Staff are more likely to have familiarity with similar systems
Immature technologies are attractive and exciting because of the opportunities that they may bring: but they bring more barriers and fewer enablers. They are higher risk, but with potentially greater reward.Mature technologies will be lower risk: cheaper and easier to implement, but with more predictable rewards.
Finally, we can think about how those characteristics translate into barriers and enablers, and choose one which best suits our goals and our needs. In general, immature technologies are associated with barriers; mature technologies with enablers.
57
BARRIERS AND MATURITY: AN EXAMPLECreating a game in 1982
Creating a game in 2017
Purchase a C64 US$595 (equivalent to £1,185 in 2016)Learn BASIC and Assembly (estimate 2 fulltime weeks for the basics to months/years to sufficient knowledge to code a game)Code the game (by typing in code)Test the game (these 2 stages together represent months to years of work, depending on complexity)Distribute the game on tape or disc, or arrange a publisher to do this for you
Purchase a generic PC (£200-500)Install GameMaker Studio Free (Free!)Learn to use GMS – can learn basics in a day, and uses a windows interface.Code and test the game – possible to create a simple game in less than a day, but more complexity means more time.Distribute and promote game online
Process
Process
FriendsCommercial books
Support mechanisms
Support mechanisms
Free community resources: forums, wikis, video tutorials, interactive tutorialsCommercial books
58
HOW TO USE THE HYPE CYCLE: SUMMARY AND GUIDE
Set out the goals of your project without specifying a specific type of technology Draw up a hype cycle for your organisation• You can use Gartner’s general cycle or our own example cycle for the voluntary
sector as a starting point Identify which technology types could fulfil your goals• This is a good stage at which to consult external experts: are you missing any
technology types off your cycle that could achieve your goals? List barriers and enablers for each suitable type• Use these as a starting point for exploring free, well-supported, open source,
and off-the-shelf solutions for mature technologies• For immature technologies, the barriers are higher and the enablers more
scarce: but if you have the resources and drive to commit to newer, untested technology types then they may still be worth considering. But if more mature technologies exist, you will need to weigh potential costs and benefits.
CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY
60
CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY I
Our findings suggest two main questions that organisations should ask in the process of adopting technology to solve challenges and problems.1. Will this technology transform our organisation’s work and day-today
activities, and does it need to?2. Will this technology – and the process of adopting it – disrupt our
organisation's work and day-today activities?There is no optimal order in which to answer these questions; instead, they should be addressed as an iterative process, to be asked of all possible types of technology that can be utilised. The first question focuses on strategy, planning and resources; while the second focuses on practical concerns and implementation.
61
CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY II
Will this technology transform our organisation’s work and day-today activities, and does it need to? This question should form part of the planning process, and inform
selection of the right type of technology to achieve the desired goal. The answers to this question will determine the level of resources to be
allocated, and subsequently inform how much risk and disruption is acceptable.
Helpful activities here may include identifying suitable technology types, examples from other organisations, and mapping examples to challenges.
62
CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY III
Will this technology – and the process of adopting it – disrupt our organisation's work and day-today activities? This question focuses on implementation, and involves looking at the
various technologies that could be implemented to meet the current challenge.
It encourages consideration of riskier, more exciting technologies – sometimes those that Garter’s Hype Cycle for Technology labels as immature – but at the same time requires these to be compared with other, more established, more mature technologies which may have fewer implementation issues.
Helpful activities here are identifying barriers and enablers, and looking at examples of mature and immature technology types and the pros/cons of each.
63
CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY IV
Technological maturity provides a method for looking at barriers, enablers and disruption in the adoption of technology.
Mature technologies – such as those that have more generic applications, are well used, have lower barriers – can be transformative, but are less likely to be disruptive.
Immature technologies – such as those that are based on new hardware or software developments, are not well used, and have more barriers to their use – can also be transformative, but the process of adopting them is likely to be more disruptive.
64
NCVO champions the voluntary sector and volunteer movement to create a better society.We connect, represent and support over 12,500 voluntary sector member organisations, from the smallest community groups to the largest charities.This helps our members and their millions of volunteers make the biggest difference to the causes they believe in.
• Search for NCVO membership• Visit www.ncvo.org.uk/join• Email [email protected]