As communicators and optimists, we believe that compelling, strategically compiled words can change the world. That is why the core of Biodiversity Project’s mission is to build the communications capacity of other nonprofits and coalitions.

Over the past 16 years, Biodiversity Project has developed a philosophy on social change and a process for incorporating values into behavior change campaigns. We use these kinds of campaigns to inspire people to adopt new habits, like recycling, conserving water or donating money. Our philosophy and process are based on research, experience and creativity. It’s a little bit science and a little bit art.

The science part of our process stems from the fantastic research of psychologists and social scientists who’ve developed models for change. While they often make for dense reading, these change models can shine some very useful light on the difficulty we adults commonly experience in changing our behaviors.

One change model, called the “Transtheoretical Model of Change,” was developed by James O. Prochaska, a psychologist at the University of Rhode Island, and a number of colleagues. Prochaska’s model of change is well known and respected in public health and other disciplines concerned with changing human behaviors.

The model describes the process of behavioral change. It answers questions like:

• Why are some people more likely than others to succeed in dropping bad habits or picking up positive new ones (like conserving water or becoming a member of an organization)?
• Why do some programs have high success rates in helping individuals make lasting changes in their lives while others rarely work?

According to this change model, successful change isn’t a single event; people don’t decide out of the blue to turn off the tap while brushing their teeth and successfully remember to turn it off every time after that. Instead, change is a process that involves five stages:

1. Precontemplation: “I’m not yet thinking about a particular behavior.”
2. Contemplation: “I’m thinking about this new behavior and weighing how it will work for me.”
3. Preparation: “I’ve made the decision to act and I’m deciding how to do it.”
4. Action: “I’m doing it for the first time, or first few times.”
5. Maintenance: “I’ve made this a continuing habit in my life.”

When we set about to recruit new donors or to ask current donors to deepen their giving—i.e. make a behavior change—we can’t jump right in and ask for money the first time we meet. If the potential donor is in the precontemplation stage, for example, they haven’t yet given any thought to our request. We probably aren’t even on their personal radar screen.

Our job then is to move our prospective donor from the precontemplation phase to the action phase using communications tools that raise awareness, arouse emotions, build relationships, prompt with reminders and directly ask them to make a change. Once people have taken the first action, we use tools to show donors that their gift was received, it was put to work as intended and the project is having the desired effect.

Models like this one help bring meaning and structure to what otherwise might feel like random activities. They can help us understand our audiences and make strategic plans for moving people through the spectrum to change.

We’d like to thank Gayle L. Gifford, ACFRE, President of Cause & Effect, Inc. for letting us share excerpts of her article “Turning Prospects into Donors: How Change Theory can Show the Way.”  Cause & Effect Inc. helps nonprofits with strategic planning, board development and other services. Read more from Gayle on her blog: www.ceffect.com/blog.

The Mississippi River Network is a coalition of 37 organizations dedicated to protecting the land, water and people of the Mississippi River basin. The Network and their public education campaign is managed by Biodiversity Project staff. The McKnight Foundation also generously supports the work of the Mississippi River Network through a multi-year grant.

The Mississippi River Network hired  Biodiversity Project to manage the first ever public opinion research done on the entire Mississippi River region. This research was used to develop a communications campaign for the ten Mississippi River states. The campaign, called 1 Mississippi, is designed to inspire policy-makers and engaged citizens to take action to restore and protect the Mississippi River and the Gulf. The 1 Mississippi campaign represents Biodiversity Project’s commitment to helping coalitions achieve common environmental goals.

The funds from the Walton Family Foundation will help the Network achieve their Land, Water and People goals in the months and years ahead. Contact us for more information on the Mississippi River Network or our coalition management and public campaign services.

Chris is a member of a land conservation organization.

She moved to the community 5-10 years ago when the housing market was flourishing because there were still undeveloped areas and lots of trees. She rarely goes to nature preserves or parks—who has the time?—but enjoys the sweeping vistas during her 40 minute commute to and from work every day. She’s worried about the effects development has on our water and air, but would never call herself an environmentalist.

If only development offices and communications managers had access to member profiles like this one! With Chris’s values and behaviors set out so clearly, member appeals would basically write themselves.

One of the best ways to grow member or donor lists is by first thoroughly understanding who our current members are. Where do they live? How do they spend their time? Where do they get local information? What do they value? What are their concerns? Once we know these details about our current members, we can extrapolate other potential audiences for future membership appeals.

But it is not enough to just ask current members a bunch of questions in online, direct mail or in-person surveys. We also have to analyze that data and turn it into values-based messages and outreach activities. Biodiversity Project recently worked with a coalition of Chicago-area land trusts and conservancies to create communications strategies and messages for growing membership lists. Our recommended strategies and messages were based on member profile data provided by participating organizations. Based on this project, we have some general recommendations for designing member profile surveys that will provide useable results and important details.

Demographics
General demographic information can help you make educated assumptions about your audience’s values and concerns. Demographic information could include age, sex, income, homeownership, address, employment status, political affiliations and number of children under the age of 18. You may find out that 54% of members are men who are closing in on retirement age. Based on publicly available public opinion research on men between the ages of 50-65, you can start to form a general idea of the variety of people who are most likely to join.

Current behaviors
Member surveys should include a set of questions about current behaviors that relate to your organization’s goals. Do they go for hikes, kayak on the river or ride their bikes? Do they attend religious congregations? Do they travel whenever they can, or are they homebodies? To what organizations do they donate? By understanding how they spend their very limited free time, you can make assumptions about what they value. If they spend quite a bit of time outdoors, then they might value fresh air and personal health. If they travel a lot, they might value freedom and independence. If they go to every local festival, then they might value community loyalty and pride.

Information sources
By understanding the pathways through which members receive local information, you can start to narrow down the best ways to use your limited fundraising and promotional dollars. Members could get local information from newspapers, flyers on telephone poles, handouts at festivals, articles in church bulletins, Facebook status updates or forwarded emails. Member surveys could reveal new pathways that your organization never thought of before.

Caveats
The people who fill out member profiles are a self-selecting group. By even taking the time to complete a survey, they are demonstrating that they are likely more engaged than your average member. Therefore results could be more favorable than a complete study of every single member would reveal. In addition, assumptions and narratives drawn from member surveys, like the description of Chris above, include generalities, estimates and plain old guesses. Some assumptions will turn out to be false, or at least not as thoroughly true as we might like. Taking the time to do research and talk face-to-face with real-life members can add more complex layers to your profiles.

Approximately every five years, the Food, Conservation and Energy Act is debated, amended and passed by Congress. Most commonly referred to as the “Farm Bill,” the 2008 version included over 1,700 pages of laws, programs and funding directives. It will cost tax payers an estimated $403.6 billion.

For all the billions of dollars that are distributed because of this bill and the very serious issues covered by this bill—energy policy, food stamp programs, water pollution and school nutrition programs—why don’t the general public and mainstream media pay more attention?

It’s a branding issue.

Because the bill is known in Congress, the media and the general public as the “Farm Bill,” non-farmers don’t realize the incredible impact this bill has on our daily lives. Although you wouldn’t know it from its popular name, the bill is about much more than agricultural policy. In fact, only about 20% of the bill’s total cost is specifically farm-related. But even that 20% of the legislation seriously impacts the health, food and environment of the entire country, not just farmers.

Calling it the “Farm Bill” keeps the majority of Americans out of the debate, which is good for special agricultural interests like factory farms, but bad for the rest of us. By renaming it the “Food Bill,” we can change the public debate, and hopefully the lasting effects, of this massive legislation.

Words matter

Changing the public debate could increase the number of people who are interested in the bill and take action to convince decision-makers to significantly transform how this bill affects our food and environment. The current language that is used to discuss the “Food Bill” works against environmental and food safety interests. We can change that rhetoric by renaming the bill and

• centering messages around widely held values, like concern for quality of life and children’s future. Messages should explain why everyone should care about the impacts of this bill, not just farmers.
• connecting this federal legislation to every day concerns. Massive, expensive legislation can seem too big and inevitable for individual people to feel like they can make a difference. Framing the debate in every day concerns, like childhood obesity and polluted drinking water, brings the bill into our homes and kitchens.
• providing a solution and personal actions. Emphasizing the ways we can alter the “Food Bill” and providing simple, specific actions that individuals can take will make the immense problem seem solvable.

Taking action
Every five years, the “Food Bill” is revised by a very small group of powerful committee members in the U.S. House and Senate. With very little input from other members of Congress, and even less from the general public, these committee members make serious decisions that have great and lasting impacts on our health, economy and environment.

Because agricultural runoff is a leading cause of pollution in the Mississippi River and the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico, the Mississippi River Network is dedicated to making the “Food Bill” more environmentally friendly. The Network, a coalition of 35 organizations dedicated to protecting the Mississippi River and managed by Biodiversity Project, is increasing public awareness, lobbying legislators and working with the Obama Administration to protect the food and environmental interests in this bill.

Changing the rhetoric that surrounds this bill in the public sphere could connect all citizens, not just the agricultural community, to this important legislative process. The $403.6 billion “Food Bill” is too important to leave solely in the hands of special agricultural interests.

Barbara Clark Smith, a curator at the National Museum of American History in Washington, DC, explored the legions of protestors at the Wisconsin state house in the early weeks of March. Her task was to find museum-worthy signs and buttons for the Smithsonian’s collection of materials dating from the dawn of the American independence.

According to a Washington Post article, this curator is part of the Smithsonian’s political history division, which examines “how citizens participate in the political process.” Without Smith’s diligence, the catchy slogans and pithy sayings of the tens of thousands of protestors who took part in this unique moment in the political process would be lost to the ages.

And with them, we’d lose valuable insight into how the complicated coalition of labor unions, government workers, political activists and student protestors eventually won the war for public opinion, even after losing specific policy battles.

As this issue of Biodiversity Project Connections goes to print, we can’t say with 100% certainty that Wisconsin’s government workers will eventually win a policy victory. And with similar battles at various stages in the Ohio, Indiana and New Hampshire state legislatures, it might be easy to claim that there are only dark days ahead for the American labor movement.

But that’s not what the public opinion polls are showing.

According to the Pew Research Center, “public attitudes about labor unions have been largely stable since the start of the battles in Wisconsin and other states.” A Pew Research poll from the end of February found favorable opinions of unions outnumbering unfavorable opinions by a 47 percent to 39 percent margin, essentially unchanged from a poll conducted in early February.

Therefore, even though Governor Walker’s proposal to dramatically curb collective bargaining for public employees in the state passed the legislature and was signed into law, the public is not on board. Governor Walk won the legislative battle, but has not yet won public opinion

Persistent messaging and casting a wide net
From the very beginning of the debate over this legislation in Wisconsin, the labor unions, government employees and supporters projected a surprisingly clear and simple message: “Governor Walker is attacking Wisconsin’s working men and women—fire fighters, teachers and nurses. We want to compromise, but their all-or-nothing attitude will destroy Wisconsin’s middle class.” As tens of thousands of people made this simple argument over and over, they swayed public opinion.

Effective messaging is more than simply repeating phrases and slogans over and over and with precision. To resonate with an audience, messages make a case for an action through a carefully organized rationale. A good message states why your particular audience should care about an issue, and it builds the case by speaking to the values and concerns of that audience.

In the case of the Wisconsin debate, the labor unions and government workers were trying to inspire a great swath of the American public—the middle class—to protest, call their legislators, write angry blog posts and generally align them. In many ways, using the whole middle class as an audience is a flawed way to run a behavior change or action campaign. Not all members of the middle class think the same, share the same demographics or even like each other.

Yet, people who identify as being part of the middle class typically share several common values and concerns. American members of the middle class might value the security that comes with home ownership, ideas that support Main Street, not Wall Street and working hard for a living. Likewise, this same group might be concerned that their status in the middle class is precarious or that others are making their personal lots in life harder than is necessary.

By playing up these “middle class” values and concerns in interviews, at protests and online, union supporters swayed the 45% of Americans who consider themselves middle class (according to an ABC World News survey) to their side.

Power of public opinion
From prohibition to gay marriage, in our democracy, public opinion changes policy. Politicians and laws that fall out of long-term favor with public opinion don’t last very long. As the Wisconsin law makes its complicated way through the court system, Walker and his supporters should take very little solace in their legislative victory.

As the Pew Poll found, half or more of the public believes that labor unions have had a positive impact on conditions for all American workers. More serious for Governor Walker and his supporters, these legislative battles over collective bargaining have energized union households and liberal Democrats. According to Pew, very favorable attitudes about unions jumped sharply in the past few weeks among both groups.

And heading into the 2012 presidential campaign, that kind of public support from an energized base with strong Get Out The Vote campaigns could change the game. Policy victories can ring hollow when the public is not on your side.

The Midwest is blessed with abundant water resources. Thanks to its many tributaries like the Ohio, Illinois and Missouri, more freshwater flows through the Mississippi River than through all but four other rivers in the entire world. The Great Lakes and their connecting channels contain roughly 18% of the world’s surface freshwater, second only to the polar ice caps. Wisconsin and Minnesota both boast having more than 10,000 lakes each.

Municipalities, environmental coalitions and water utility companies often struggle when creating and implementing behavior change campaigns to reduce water use and pollution in the American Midwest. To many Midwesterners, these abundant resource make it seem like freshwater is an unlimited resource.

But it’s not.

With so much water for drinking, swimming and fishing at our easy disposal, communicators must connect water conservation and pollution messages to the values that audiences already hold dear.

Since 1995, Biodiversity Project has worked with cities, coalitions and nonprofit organizations to persuade people to change harmful water behaviors through values-based communications. While every audience is unique, our work to protect water and reduce pollution in the Mississippi River, Great Lakes and through several local stormwater campaigns in the Rock River basin in Wisconsin and Scioto River basin in Ohio has taught us some fundamental water communications strategies

Connect water issues to our national economy
In poll after poll, Americans rank jobs, the economy and government spending as their primary concerns, but that doesn’t mean they don’t also care about water quality. Instead, this information provides insight on some of the best ways to talk about the importance of water quality issues. For example, in the Great Lakes, research from the Brookings Institute has shown that for every dollar put into restoration, the region gets two dollars back on the investment.

In addition, many municipalities and regions are faced with serious price stags for infrastructure repairs. The simple fact that the cost of restoring our waterways will increase the longer we wait—like fixing a leaky roof—can help persuade audiences to take action now. If water quality is poor, more treatment (and thus more chemicals and energy) are necessary to treat it. If a utility has to pump water from greater depths as aquifers decline, energy costs will be greater.

Talk about family expenses
Americans are also concerned about their personal financial health—and water isn’t free. Communicators can appeal to an audience’s personal finances to persuade them to change behaviors like over-watering the lawn. In an annual survey, Circle of Blue, an international network of journalists and scientists that reports information on the global freshwater crisis, found that the price of water is going up. Water prices in 30 U.S. metropolitan areas have increased an average of over 9 percent for residential customers with medium consumption levels. Since 2010, the largest relative rate increases occurred in Indianapolis (29.3 percent increase), Milwaukee (25.4 percent), and Houston (24.3 percent). From 2007 to 2010, the cost of water in Chicago increased by half.

Include place-based examples
One of the most powerful and successful examples of place-based messaging on water quality in the past 60 years is the iconic image of the Cuyahoga River burning in Cleveland. By naming a city and river, people can more easily connect with it and the need for change. Therefore, we don’t want to just “protect our waterways,” we want to “protect the Rock River in Beloit.” Identify specific problems in a local waterway and point to actual sources. For example, “leaves and yard waste from the Dublin’s Wedgewood Glen neighborhood cause ugly algae blooms in the Scioto River.”

Use numbers—sparingly
Statistics can be a great way to explain the magnitude of a problem, but too many numbers and numbers that are too big cause people to simply gloss over them as inconsequential and impossible to understand. Whenever possible, show numbers with charts and comparisons so they have meaning. For example, the average American uses about 151 gallons of water per day. The average European uses only 66 gallons per day. In addition, be sure to use units of measurement that your audience will understand: gallons instead of liters or miles instead of kilometers.

Midwesterners are generally proud of the region and the incredible freshwater resources that help define it. By appealing to their closely held values like community and regional pride and economic concern, we can rally support for water protections and inspire audiences to change behaviors.

Biodiversity Project seeks a full-time program manager with exceptional coordination skills to manage the Mississippi River program. Ideal candidates will have at least 2-3 years of experience managing coalitions, facilitating meetings and over-seeing broad strategy goals.

The Mississippi Program Manager manages the Mississippi River Network (MRN). The MRN is a coalition of 37 organizations dedicated to protecting and restoring the Mississippi River for the well-being of the land, water and people of the country’s greatest River. Biodiversity Project has managed this Network and its component communications and policy strategies since 2008.

Biodiversity Project is a nonprofit organization that designs, implements and evaluates communication, education and outreach initiatives that inspire people to make the connection between their values and environmental causes.  Our work motivates targeted audiences to take action to protect and restore the Earth’s natural resources and to use them sustainably.

The Mississippi Program Manager will work with Biodiversity Project’s Executive Director and Communications Manager to develop public communications and policy strategies. The Program Manager will then coordinate and implement these two parallel and interconnected strategies. The Program Manager will also coordinate the efforts of two MRN staff: the Mississippi Campaign Manager (who implements the public campaign strategy) and the Mississippi Policy Manager (who implements the policy strategy). The Program Manager will ensure that the Network’s communications and policy strategies are consistently moving forward and that all efforts complement each other.

The Mississippi Program Manager will follow the governance rules created by the Network members. The Network governance includes three standing committees: Steering, Policy, and Public Communications. The Program Manager will facilitate and encourage member engagement in all three committees as well as at the Network’s annual meeting. This job does require travel, approximately 8-15 times per year.

In addition to managing the Mississippi River Network, the Mississippi Program Manager will use approximately 15% of their time working on Biodiversity Project related programs. This work will require similar skills and include similar activities as those listed below.

Responsibilities for the Mississippi River Program:

• Create agendas for and facilitate all committee meetings—Steering, Policy and Public Communications
• Create agendas for and facilitate all internal MRN meetings with Policy Manager and Campaign Manager
• Create agendas for and facilitate all internal MRN planning meetings for long-term strategy and last-minute opportunities (including Executive Director, Communications Manager, Policy Manger and Campaign Manager)
• Manage MRN budgets
• Coordinate the work of Campaign Manager and Policy Manager
• Assist with editing of Mississippi-related materials, articles, press releases, grants, grant reports, fact sheets, website text, Power Point presentations and monthly Network updates
• Represent the Network at non-Network meetings
• Give presentations on MRN goals and strategies to partners, funders and peers
• Recruit new MRN members
• MRN member development (phone calls and check-ins) to ensure that all members are engaged
• Supervise grants and foster relationships with corporate sponsors
• Develop long-term communications strategies for MRN members, River Citizens and Media
• Organize MRN annual meeting agenda and logistics
• Perform other duties, as assigned

Responsibilities for Biodiversity Project work:

• Attend staff meetings
• Participate in group work sessions, like strategic planning, brainstorming, large mailings, etc.
• Help with non-Mississippi related writing tasks, as necessary and appropriate
• Targeted fundraising and grant writing

Qualifications:

• Experience managing a coalition
• Experience working on a large, multi-faceted environmental or policy campaign
• Excellent inter-personal skills and a friendly, outgoing manner
• Ability to lead and facilitate meetings
• Adept at managing and coordinating several different projects simultaneously
• Comfortable with networking, meeting new people and building relationships
• Must have previously worked as part of a team
• Strong attention to details

Hours

This is a salaried full time position.

Location

Biodiversity Project’s offices are located at 4507 North Ravenswood in Chicago.

Salary and Benefits

• $40,000 annual salary
• $300 per month towards a Health Reimbursement Account (this is different than a Health Savings Account)
• Vacation:         Year 1: 15 days

Year 2 and on: 20 days

After 5 years: 25 days

• Nine paid sick days
• Ten paid holidays

Reporting
The Mississippi Program Manager reports to the Executive Director. The Mississippi Campaign Manager and the Mississippi Policy Manager also report to the Executive Director. However it is the role of the Mississippi Program Manager to coordinate the work of the Campaign and Policy Managers.

Application Details

Prepare a cover letter detailing how you meet the qualifications listed above. E-mail cover letter and resume to Jennifer Browning, jbrowning@biodiverse.org. In the e-mail subject line write Mississippi Program Manager. No phone calls, please. Applications will be accepted until July 31, 2011.

American Rivers gave a ‘special mention’ to the river today in its list of America’s Most Endangered Rivers TM of 2011. American Rivers made the last minute addition to the list due to the unprecedented nature of the flooding, and  the opportunity to improve flood management for public safety and river health.

In listing the Mississippi as a “special mention,” American Rivers pointed to outdated flood management strategies and over-reliance on levees that have contributed to the record flood damage. You can read more about this designation at www.americanrivers.org/Mississippi.

This status will help bring big attention to the Mississippi River throughout the year.  The Mississippi River Network, managed by Biodiversity Project, submitted an application for 2011 endangered River status earlier this year.

The Rock River Stormwater Group (RRSG), a coalition of municipalities, agencies and nonprofit organizations in southern Wisconsin that is managed by Biodiversity Project, is partnering with University of Wisconsin—Whitewater again this spring. Last year, dozens of students and RRSG members built a 1,000 square foot rain garden. This year, students are invited to create short Public Service Announcement videos that inform and instruct young people about the issues in the Rock River basin and what people can do to protect their waters. The winner will get a new digital video camera and runners up will get other great prizes. This contest will help the RRSG meet some of its education goals while engaging a new generation of environmentalists.

The Mississippi River Network, a coalition of 35 organizations dedicated to protecting the Mississippi River and managed by Biodiversity Project, is poised to make 2011 its biggest year yet. With the generous support of the Walton Family Foundation, Biodiversity Project has hired two new talented staff members to implement separate parts of the overall Network strategy. The Network is implementing both a policy strategy and a public communications campaign, called 1 Mississippi. Leading the policy tract for the Network is Bill Wenzel, a seasoned advocate with significant experience working on behalf of both environmental and food safety issues. Bill’s work is guided by the Mississippi River Network policy committee. Nancy Paraskevopoulos will serve as the 1 Mississippi Campaign Organizer. She will work with Network organizations to recruit and engage River Citizens in this ten-state effort to protect the Mississippi River.