-----original message-----
<http://blog.deborah.elizabeth.finn.com/blog/_archives/2007/5/27/2979346.html>
I'll play Devil's Advocate on this one. Not that I'm enamored with the effort by LinkedIn, but because I do think it has some unique characteristics.
First and foremost, the small selection of charities by LinkedIn could generate more contributions. Why? Their audience is not primarily a plethora of do-gooders daily promoting the causes of non-profits or saving the world. So when people on LinkedIn that simply want to contribute but not research, or get a tug at the heart-strings to help, looking at a place like Change.org has the possibility of overwhelming them and causing indecision to the point of NOT contributing. One visit to the front page of Change.org, and I'm overwhelmed by causes I want to help, and not a lot of data to help me make a decision. I'm willing to dig a little deeper, but what about those who are standing with $10 in hand and trying to figure out which bucket? Good chance they're sticking that $10 back in their pocket in frustration for not being able to do enough or because they just can't choose.
In addition, a coordination with Change.org by LinkedIn could cause some political struggles. There is not a lot of politics with a donation to places like the Red Cross. That all changes when you introduce more inherently "moral" causes, i.e. "Federal Funding for Stem Cell Research" (as on the main page of Change.org right now). You could seriously limit your audience and cause a negative effect, and the overhead of managing such a delicate issue may be more costly than beneficial.
(I think Change.org is doing a tremendous job, and there is a place in this digital world for what they do, so please do not take my comments as negative against Change.org. This is about the LinkedIn For Good campaign.)
In addition, the LinkedIn For Good campaign to allow non-profits free job postings could have a tremendous outcome for the non-profit world. With LinkedIn, you have access to an entirely new demographic of very talented people, a lot of whom are working very hard at making somebody else rich. When those people look for jobs, chances are they are not checking out Idealist regularly. So when the next burnout point comes, and they start looking, having a mainstream professionals community posting up jobs within the non-profit community could provide a nice niche. Sure Monster and Yahoo HotJobs have the ability to search Non-Profit jobs, and the success will depend on how well it is implemented by LinkedIn, but in a bigger mindset, the ability to entice those who may be at the top of their game into working for something bigger than just another company and really making a difference, could funnel some very excellent people to some organizations which desperately need them.
In the end I hope it is mutually beneficial. Perhaps I'm more of an "effort is effort" guy, silo or not. Whether for good reasons or simply a marketing effort, LinkedIn has a niche and I'm glad to see some effort at using it for good.
.
