"But it does mean that if you’re involved in nonprofits (or predictions), you need to be much more careful about making sure you’re doing a good job. Unfortunately, few nonprofits do that." Oh really? So he can cite research that says, for example, that only x% (where x His assertion may be true. But just throwing this out there with absolutely nothing to back it up, in a blog post titled "The Trouble With Nonprofits…
I've worked at two social ventures that had non-profits as clients (Web Networks, and most recently Urbantastic.com). There emphatically is something wrong with non-profits. Just because there are some excellent ones (Sturgeon's law applies) doesn't mean that the field at large isn't ill. An anecdote: we had a meeting with a guy who worked at a large company with a philanthropic streak. They provided, free of charge,…
They have an irrational fear of technology, and it may be because they believe nonprofits should be modeled after the 60s and 70s counterculture-based nonprofits where technology was distrusted as being a tool of the Man (a lot of money was poured into computers via AI funding, defense grants, etc).
It is awful and sad that they would not use Urbantastic because it sounds like a great idea.