November 07, 2001
Contributed By Nan Hawthorne

Why do organizations seek volunteer help? There is no more important
question you can ask before you initiate a volunteer program at your
organization. Your answers will demonstrate your awareness of the
potential of volunteers and define how well they will fit into and
contribute to your success.

If you believe volunteers only make you look good to the community or
are just a tradition, you will miss a great deal of the benefit a
volunteer program can offer. It is likely that you will need to
create largely unnecessary work for them, underestimate the skills
needed to contribute to your work and miss many of the sound volunteer
management principles better understood in better designed programs.

Let's start with the first very simple reason an organization, any
organization, involves volunteers:

1. There is important work to be done.

The "important work to be done" is the individual organization's
mission in the community. You must start here. Too many
organizations and their volunteer resource managers operate from the
point of view that volunteers are an end unto themselves. They put
volunteers first. In reality the organization's mission always comes
first. Volunteers, and paid staff as well, are there to serve that
purpose, not the other way around. Not only does putting volunteers
first put the organization at risk by, for example, allowing very bad
volunteers to interact with clients and the public. It robs the
organization. You cannot use volunteers' skills well unless you know
what skills are needed. To do what? To do the important work that
has to be done.

Once you identify the important work your organization is doing,
you can begin to understand what role volunteers can play.

2. Volunteers are part of the best way to get that important work done.

That is, they are much more than just free labor. If you recruit
for skills, you can find people who will be happy to offer them. You
simply could never pay for the talent and knowledge these volunteers
want to give you.

They can bring material help through their extended contacts in
your community. They have access to resources from their employers or
their own businesses. They know journalists, civic leaders and
philanthropists. They know what the community beyond your four walls
thinks about what you are doing.

They bring money. Not only are volunteers generally devoted
donors as well, they raise money for you just through their enthusiasm
about what you do. The public relations extends to people who,
looking for a worthy destination for their money and time, see that
you have a thriving volunteer program, evidence of wise use of their
donations in a world where charities are not always trusted.

It is a mistake to underestimate the freshness a volunteer brings
to an organization. While staff can become inured to the routine,
volunteers' focus, commitment and enthusiasm can energize and refocus
staff and make them happier and more productive.

Pay attention to the fact that we said "part of the best way."
All-volunteer organizations, they are not always the most effective in
solving community problems. But because volunteers can bring in more
and different skills and resources, having a volunteer program allows
you to get your important work done more effectively.

If you understand the potential of a volunteer program, you will
understand that strong and skillful leadership is a key ingredient.

3. Good volunteer management makes sure that important work gets done
well.

Effective volunteer management makes sure you do not waste time,
money, resources, good will and people. To make sure the
organization makes best use of these valuable voluntary human
resources, its leaders must recognize that it is that not just anyone
can manage a volunteer program. Volunteer resource management is a
set of skills, tools and knowledge. Hiring and supporting a
professional volunteer resource manager is essential if you want to
get the important work of your organization accomplished in the best
possible way.

Roger_jg

http://www.villagetalk.net/blog/one-entry?entry%5fid=34274
http://www.villagetalk.net/blog/one-entry?entry%5fid=34265

Very inspirational and educational as to where we could fit in…
Ben

So, maybe there is a lack of knowledge to matters that concern what we have been doing whilst they were living their life, but to presume that they lack knowledge is rather patronizing.

This should inform us when we approach problem solving in the developing world. First we should not assume that only us have the answer to the needs of a developing community. Second we may consider first how the local knowledge would answer the problem. Third the local solution should be favored against a foreign intervention.

Obviously there is room for flexibility, but this raises a surprising question: What can we give that is of use to a local community? And do we give it best?

Roger_jg

Any OVO that aim to be efficient should not be organized because it relies on disorganized workers: the bee workers mentioned earlier.

What the OVO should aim at is to provide an environment for the people to be able to work together with minimal rules, interferences and dependence from a mother-like figure organisation. It should be self govern like Wikipedia is, it should broaden space rather than constrict it, it should offer a minimum number of regulatory processes but a large number of "opportunity processes".

Most fundamentally it must be based on the expectations and interests of those who contribute to it and not try to create a system framing people! On the contrary it should fit itself to the people. The OVO should not aim at framing working environments but should let them grow by themselves.

The best example here is MySpace and Facebook. MySpace is well know for a messy interface but that did not stop people joining in and making it the archetype of social networking! (despite the pre-existence of other similar but less flexible systems).

What MySpace did was to say: here is a space, here are some efficient and trendy tools for you to use, do what you want with it. People joined in, created their environment, attracted and found others with similar interests and started to exchange with one another, learn from one another. MySpace pushed the boundary of blogging one netuniverse further.

And this is what the OVO should not be doing: Re-inventing social networking, it has been done already and we are past it!

Of course I am not blind to its fault. As it is the case with blogging, assiduity and interest in developing one's space has fadded quickly in a majority of cases.

The operational rules of the OVO should be simple, limited and favoured one thing: emergence, also known as self organisation.

What all of this is about is social networking, but with an aim: philanthropy. But nothing new here. It already exists, it already happens, it already works (see Idealist for only one example), but its full potential has yet to be revealed and exploited so that those most in need can benefit from it.

Answers will come from the people, not from the tools. The answer to cutting raw meet was no the silex, but the person who came up with the idea of silex cutting, then it was only a question of craftsmanship

More to come soon….

Roger_jg

PS: You may wonder what that has to do with Lao.. Well, it is fascinating to observe how people in a resources limited setting come up with solutions to their everyday problems and without the Internet, simply by networking. A lot has been forgotten and need to be re-discovered.

Ben

Quote…
"In the end, Bunde questioned whether outside experts really understand the problems in Sauri. While life had improved in the years since the Millennium Village experiment began, Bunde wondered fearfully what will happen when the project ends, “because we have become so dependent.” Change, he said, needs to be led from inside the village. “As we say here, only the wearer knows where the shoe pinches.”

to see who's twittering there's this nifty Twittervison http://twittervision.com/ and ther's plenty of ways to create our own private twitter network, as the software is open source. The twitterblog is an interesting source of info on how a start up got started http://twitter.com/blog

a scenario….

Twitter and other constant-contact media create social proprioception. They give a group of people a sense of itself, making possible weird, fascinating feats of coordination.

For example, when I meet Misha for lunch after not having seen her for a month, I already know the wireframe outline of her life: She was nervous about last week's big presentation, got stuck in a rare spring snowstorm, and became addicted to salt bagels. With Dodgeball, I never actually race out to meet a friend when they report their nearby location; I just note it as something to talk about the next time we meet. http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/magazine/15-07/st_thompson#

Here's what folks have already created http://twitter.pbwiki.com/Mashups.

What this approach shows is that's it's not a fancy website that makes the difference, it's the ability of people to communicate irrespective their preference and available budget. Web site's are gradually becoming less relevant, it's how tools help shape your future that counts!. The merger between web and mobile phones opens up a totally different world
I am sure if we have a nerd looking at the interface he/she'lll be able to cook up a nice solution for Africa!

Cheers
Ben

Since this is all about action, the control vocabulary should be based on active verbs, nouns and a relation to a subject. I am aware it all seems a bit esoteric but let's practice…

Verb: Find (but not Search) - Identify - Contact -

Noun: Information - Person - Organisation - Means - Needs

Complement: Responsible (in charge) - Purpose

What I am heading at here, is that there is a need to very clearly frame and define the work a volunteer should be doing.

Roger_jg

What would an office be good for in an online volunteer organisation?

Let's say:

• screening applicant's project? Ah Ha! Project you say? Are we talking about projects here? Is it realistic to run full project with online volunteers only? Possibly. if one takes great defining what kind of project!

• Managing resources? Hrm well.. Does someone manages Wikipedia? Yes, its users!

• Bringing together volunteers and the community? Well, the community can self advertise and the volunteer know to read and can come forward!

• Ensuring that projects are genuine? hard task, especially from afar, some trust is needed especially if money is not involved.

• Fundraising? This is a very demanding administrative activity that few online organisation would engage in.

Overall there is very little use for an office and many organisations have started with minimal personal, often unpaid (see the article I referenced elsewhere) who remember the beginning of Avaaz?

[roger_jg]

I have been experimenting this model for a few months now acting both as workerbee and to some extend specialist My experience shows that this format will actually shift the amount of work directly related to the challenge, from be being a local problem with 50 %, which means the local issues automatically get devided into manageable tasks. Once you have seen how it works it becomes real fun as you start delegating more complex tasks (these will not be real problems for the professional you contact, as it's their line of work). These however can in most cases never be solved without 3 party support at a country level where the service desk has the proper contacts and is always in the know of what's going behind the scenes. That way answering trivial questions is not really a problem because the desk will not have to spend much time on research.

An added benefit is that it will identify simple actions that will increase motivation of the local community to come out and play too, who than fill in the blanks that otherwise would have been done by the workerbees themselves. To see that happen is very rewarding. It also shows that the original plan may in the end not be the solution to the problems people are trying to solve, so this concept also prevents people from wasting valuable time on mission impossible dreams, yet at the same time it offers the applicant a workable alternative.

To make this all work you don't need a fancy website, just a few simple tools like a chat box and a web log managed by the people working on the project. The output in the end can be simple email or even sms, so nobody has a learning curve finding his/her way around the activities. Behind the scenes all you have backoffice web toolkit aggregating issues and achievements into a presentable format so the PR folks can beat their drum.

I think we are on the same hymn sheet here !

Do not sell the organisation to volunteesr, sell an opportunity for the potential volunteer to put their skills at use in a rewarding action!

Move from need to resources, in other word it is the kitchen door salesman vs. the local market. In this vision some core volunteers would be in charge of pro actively contacting those with the appropriate skills, rather than problem being exhibits on the local market waiting for potential buyers!

Roger_jg

• There is no learning curve
• Professionals have easy access to problems that need to be solved and they know can be solved by investing a minimum of their valuable time by solving bottlenecks less qualified vollunteers won't be able to tackle.
• What I mean is you need a project management structure whereby "workerbees" keep track of the basic picture and call in support from the pro's for detailed advise. I am convinced in many cases a simple email will be enough to move a project forward.
• There is a simple service desk per basic topic, ie if banking & financing is the issue we need to have the support of banker and accountant as they speak the lingo. If you're talking about a building initiative, you need to have a resident vollunteer architect to prevent nice ideas and dreams from spiraling out of control etc. If your are setting up an ICT center try to get the support of biggest geek around to translate the plan, and prepare a proposal to the resident Telecom company. Do it once per country, and you can solve problems in multiple projects and at the same time motivate sponsors to come on board.

I am convinced we have all these specialisms within our network, but none of these folks have ever been asked to participate this way, although I have seen it happen in isolated projects, that's exactly the situation we want to prevent .

One thing is essential, don't try to sell the OVO organization, sell the challenges to problem solvers and financial partners. The OVO head office is only the engine driving progress on the ground, not a pretty billboard! and should have one goal only… to become irrelevant as soon as possible …
Just my simple vision
More later
Ben

It is indeed essential to know WHO are the people willing or trying to do some online volunteer. Unfortunately it is difficult to conduct a survey in this regards, but a US Survey do exist about more traditional form of OV.

The way round this is to try to define ourselves the audience we think we have, based on ourself, our friends and our experience. At least it is possible to drawn an outline of our Weekend Warrior. Of course there will always be exception… That's taken for granted!

Time: The Weekend Warrior is an active person who has limited time to invest.
Attention Span: The Weekend Warrior has a short attention span. It can be extended but overall he won't engage in long term project.
Knowledge: The weekend warrior has the knowledge of his trade and hobbies.
Skills: The skills of the weekend warrior are limited or highly technical (in another word: limited! Not useless though!!!)
Learning curve: can learn quickly or slowly but considering the limited amount of time available, tends to dislike complex systems and processes.
Motivation: parallels that of the attention span

Do you see something to add or correct. Of course we are not here talking about hard core volunteers…

Roger_jg

This amount of time is not boundless but it can be shortened or extended depending on the motivation of the nabuur which itself depends on the reward the volunteer get and how close (s)he is to the project.

I believe that closeness is more important. Someone who is really involved with the work done with a community will always find the time to contribute.

if the volunteer is not treated properly, if he thinks he is wasting his time his enthusiasm while decrease as will his contribution.

Then there is the need of putting the volunteer skills to good use.

This reflexion is somewhat changing my perspective of who is leading what. The community may be leading the project, but what is leading to success is the volunteers.

Roger_jg

I would like more people to contribute on this forum, where I am struggling to trigger a debate! It maybe that not so many people are interested in discussing this issue.

Let see how it develops during the next two weeks.

Roger_jg

Keep smiling
Ben

Initially i suggested that the goal of this forum is to develop a scheme/organisation that will successfully deliver assistance where it is needed in a timely fashion.

The mission of the OVO will be somewhat similar but shorter To successfully deliver relevant assistance where it is needed in a timely fashion.

Of course we could built on that. What kind of assistance? (See the dedicated forums)
Where? How? What means timely fashion?

This being clarified, it should then be easier to devise appropriate mechanism. But I fear I am avoiding answering this question, only because i need your help ! So jump in and tell me what you think. Is this going in the right direction?

Roger_jg

When governance and policies are clear, everybody know what to do and how to do it. Confusion is born and bread from ignorance and obscurantism.

The role of the platform is fundamental too. The better the platform teh less direct management is needed!

I we agree on these premises then the next step is to look at what needs to be managed….

What are you looking for?

- Speed of delivery
- Previous successes of the OVO
- Location
- Others

What do you expect the OVO will achieve? How quickly?

Let us know about your feeling towards online volunteering organisations and what you really expect form them.

Roger_jg

Let say a community is having a problem of water sanitation. One of the first task necessary to tackle the community's problem is to survey the various WatSan methods available. Since I know nothing next to nothing about WatSan i will have to spend some time looking first at what water sanitation means then at the available methods currently used.

But somewhere else, another volunteer of the same OVO is working on a similar problem and has already gone through this stage. I am therefore re-inventing the wheel.

My point here is twofold:

- I need to invest time in an issue I am not familiar with
- Someone else has already gone through the process and know the answers I am looking for

Solution A:

- Provide knowledge primer
- Connect people or projects related to the same issues
- Organise resources in a knowledge base (HERE is an example on how to do it easily using a Wiki)

Solution B:

- attribute project to people who are knowledgeable in the field

The two solutions are not mutually exclusive but require a different mechanism of project attribution and management.

Roger_jg

But for communities in need, accessing the Net maybe more a problem than a solution!

First you need a computer and a phone line. Those cost money that will come from "selling mangoes and bananas" as friend put it, and a lot of them. Second youneed someone who know how to use the Internet.

Of course there is the solution of the omnipresent Internet cafe, though I doubt it would be easy to find one in a refugee camp in Uganda… And young people are nowaday familliar with basic internet features (emails and forum).

Hence, the aims of an OVO is immediately curtailed to solving problems of communities which can reasonably access the internet, even thought there is no guaranty that the community can easily and regularly access the net.

What you say?

Roger_jg

• Finding and dispatching teaching equipment (books, pen, paper, notebooks)
• Finding and dispatching computers
• Finding organisations supporting educational projects in developing countries
• Finding volunteers willing to go and teach or train teachers in developing countries
• Preparing grant/letter of application for funding or support
• Finding and adapting curriculum (but NOT developing curriculum, that's reinventing the wheel)
• Finding blueprints for school building

But NOT building the school, this an overwhelming task and I am not even convinced that a specific building is necessary. I remember my first year at school, we did have a building but we also had 4 different levels in the same classroom!

Any other ideas?

Roger_jg

I think it says it all !!!

Roger_jg

Tips: to sign with your user name type [[*user your-user-name]]

• VolunteerMatch
• TimeBank
• NetworkForGood

I think the Time bank and VolunteerMatch have nice and user friendly interface.
Network for good is a bit more clumsy.

It is worth noticing that mostif not all opportunities are in the real world.

Roger_jg

An online volunteer organization (OVO) is at a distinct disadvantage in this respect. There is very little that can be done as a group to raise funds online. How does one establish the credibility necessary for the donor to feel secure that their funds will be well spent? What exactly is the entity the donor is sending funds to? In my experience, this method does not have a high success rate.

As mentioned elsewhere, I believe that an OVO might succeed best by acting as a broker between the community in need and established charitable organizations, finding a match between the community and the organization that would be best able/willing to meet their needs.

I'm hoping others here have had better experience with the fundraising/OVO experience. What have your experiences been? And what are your thoughts on a better way?

In a recent post Siegfried asked how can we be sure the OVO is genuine. How do we know that the community is genuine?

My answer to that would be to position the OVO as a B2B, linking established and well known organisations to recognized communities.

For instance, last week, I was contacted by a friend working at the Bangkok Refugee Centre (BRC). She asked me to design a School Health programme for the refugee's children and to organise a training session for the teachers. In this situation, the BRC is run by the UNHCR, and the community of refugees is recognized as genuine.

As a volunteer I acted as a B2B would have. I provided a (free) service to a company that serves a community in need. Hence the "genuine" aspect was not an issue.

This may exclude some communities, but I don't think many will be excluded as there are many way for a community and its problems to be recognised. Also many are already working with recognized organisations.

If I follow this reasoning, the OVO would not work for the community but for an organisation who work for a community. We are closer here to the Idealist.org model.

As much as I enjoy Idealist.org, I found it too difficult to access both for the community and for the volunteers. Also most of the volunteering is not Online. But an OVO built on this model is possible.

~R

All these friendly demands requests time. MY time. And if most of the time I am happy to oblige I need to factor that in my day/week schedule.

I believe it is the same for an online volunteer who has decided to give part of his free time to do something online. Now this free time is not unlimited! It is then reasonable that online work must match what a volunteer is happy to give.

This raises the question of Task vs. Project. A project will require a lot of time whilst tasks are less time demanding. I agree that a project can be cut into small parts, but there is still a need for someone to oversee the project and ensure it is going the right way. I am not thinking here about a facilitator or a Moderator as discussed elsewhere, but of a real project manager.

Is that something a Online Voluntary Organisation (OVO) can afford? If not what kind of "projects/Tasks" such OVO can take on? Does it limit the scope or ambition of the OVO?

What you say?

~R

A site owner can only provide the fertile ground on which a community may grow, and then provide some gentle guidance to help the group thrive.

I believe this is fundamental. One can not force people to come and join a community and contribute to it, but one can create a fertile ground. Again, these writers also point at teh fact that technology is not enough,. A cursory look at MySapce is enough to be convince. MySpace is one of the most messy, ugly and user unfriendly environment that one could have come up with but IT WORKS!

Why, because it is simple! It does the job!

The idea of a rotating moderator is also interesting because people can then experiment contributing in a different function.

Keep the suggestions and observations coming !

Thx
~R

The Book club is a very good example. People join a book club because they have a passion, and interest in reading book. If I understand well the modus operandi of your book club, the moderator choose a book that the member have to read (!) and then discuss it.

That is interesting because there is sense of community, conviviality, of exchange of idea and of reward. What do you get back form your involvement in the book club? A personal satisfaction to have read a new book, discovered a new 'world", been exposed to others' thoughts, hence personal growth.

This is this kind of environment a OVO should aim at creating, a place where the volunteer are getting something back in return for their contribution.

~R

Some posts are locked but you can create a new thread in each section.

Otherwise I fully agree with you, different people, different definition an most of the time Vision and mission can be blurred into one, or at least read as one paragraph.

~R

Indeed, how do we know that the people are genuine on both side of the keyboard?

Would some institutional backing on the one hand and ground survey on the other reassure potential online volunteers?

~R

* can I trust the organization that runs the website?
* who is the person / the group that I am assisting?
* how do I know their questions are for real?
* how can I see the effect of my time and effort

In the case of NABUUR it could read something like this:
Vision
NABUUR.com aspires to give thousands of Villages in developing countries direct access to the people and resources they need to solve their problems.
Mission
NABUUR.com provides an internet platform where Villages get effective and trusted assistance from online volunteers.

I agee with you that a well functioning group can govern itself and that a natural overall leader may emerge eventually. But I think that a group still needs someone to start things rolling and keep them rolling

I totally agree that the natural leader may emerge from a group, but what about the group that does not have a natural leader. There are many groups to be seen on Nabuur as having stalled without a facilitator.

Or perhaps there is a natural leader who does not have the time or want to take the effort of leading that particular project.

Or perhaps there are two natural leaders to emerge on a project who have trouble working together.

Which brings me back to Teresa's second sentence above. The group still needs someone to keep things rolling, deal with personality conflicts, keep things on track.

Perhaps the role is one of managing personalities rather than technical aspects of the project, the role that we, on the internet, have come to know as moderator. As Teresa states, someone to manage personalities, keep things on topic, maintain motivation, etc. rather than/as well as participating in the project. The moderator who was also involved in the project would not have to be publicly identified as moderator, but rather could play two very separate roles. That way the project members would have technical and creative freedom to take the project where it may without having a "leader" who they felt the urge to defer to.

I belong to an online book discussion group that operates, very successfully, on this principle. The "owner" of the site is moderator, keeps the site functioning, moderates book selections, etc. Each discussion goes where it will amongst the participants, occasionally being "restrained" by the moderator as necessary. For all I know, the "owner" also has a separate persona that he uses to participate in book discussions.

The moderator could operate on the project just as "moderator." No other personal, identifying features that would encourage the group to identify him/her as leader. The moderator would appear to be more a function of the running of the site as pertains to that project rather than a personality involved in the project.

Any thoughts?

I have been trying to follow the 19-pages thread about "Polishing the brass on the titanic" at O/N, and I find the lack of threading and numerous divergency a big problem to follow a discussion requiring some organisation. The all in one thread approach does not work for me, hence this forum. I also would like to be on neutral ground.

I will try to improve the navigation in this forum, thought I would have thought that by reading the START Here page it would be clear!

I'll improve!

Regards
~R

EDIT: I have modified the left Navigation menu to show the forum more easily, added more navigation links, and more indications on where to go to do what. I hope this will help! Thx again for the comment.

I think theses questions are very relevant but mine will be different. I will try to go back in time when I knew little about OV and try to remember what I looked for first before joining and OVO (Online Volunteering Organisation)

1. What kinds of projects are supported by the organisation?

I would preferably to do something I am qualified for or for which I have an interest.

2. How much time will I need to spend online?

This is important as I have only a limited amount of time to give (the initial “one hour a day” did turn into a 2 hours a day at some point…)

3. Who is being the organisation?

I am always concerned by the political, religious or other ties of an organisation. This does not mean I would not support an organisation which does not share my ideas, but there are important principles to respect.

4. What contribution am I suppose to make?

This is the “nitty gritty” of the work itself. Translation work usually bores me, as do looking for information, but some people enjoy this kind of work.

5. Will I have an opportunity to network and exchange ideas with other people?

This is very important for me as I enjoy interacting with others.

Of course after several months doing some OV, my questions would now be very different and much more in line with those of Katie and Teresa!

~R

A community website, a meeting place for those in needs to meet those willing to help, a good knowledge management approach are essential but they won’t provide a concrete answer to a community’s problem.

ICT can do wonderful and trendy things but there is a real danger to be overwhelmed by information (most of it often irrelevant). It can also scatter energy and can often scare entry level users.

Most importantly, ICT does not offer universal access to the community in needs that may have to invest a lot of “mangoes and banana” (as a friend of mine says) to get online. We should not forget that when thinking about the best IT platform.

~R

I share your vision of where such "organization" would fit best in the world of philanthropy. Not re-inventing the wheel is fundamental too.

The advantage of "match making" is that it opens the organisation to more people, though, "expert" in one field would know better and faster where to find appropriate help, but there are a lot of basic tasks that do not require expertise!

Katie's matchmaking + Ben's online self manage knowledge distribution seems to point the "organisation" toward a capacity building role where the leader remains the community. Though there is a risk the community might not take the best direction. There is something to explore here viz. the initial question.

What you say?

~R

http://www.dotlrn.org

~R

Interesting platform.

I posted it in teh IT platform for us to discuss at another stage.

~R

1. Can I see examples of successfully completed projects?

2. What time commitment is required on the part of the volunteer? What are the consequences of not meeting this time commitment (i.e. Are volunteers who join but never participate removed from the system, so that there is an accurate representation of volunteers available?)

3. How are the projects financed? Is fundraising done within this organization, by the community, or by partnered organizations?

4. What is the scope of projects undertaken both in terms of size of undertaking (books for a school versus building the school) and areas of undertaking (education, health, wat/san)?

5. How is the link to the community maintained? What provisions are in place for areas that have unreliable/no internet service?

These certainly have a lot in common with Teresa's list. I have tried to broaden some of them. For instance, rather than "is fundraising involved?," I have put forth a more general question of "where does the money for the project come from?" I really like Teresa's item #5. Very important. I also agree with the word finished in item #1! My belief is that projects are exciting and easy to start, and get more boring and difficult as they progress, as a rule.

This has brought up a number of questions in my mind, which I will bring up in the appropriate places on the site. It was an interesting exercise. Thanks Roger.

Katie
Katie

Your scenario is just what I am working on at http://www.villagetalk.net . Once finalized it is an on-line university as it's using http://www.dotlrn.org . It automatically connect you to http://www.dotlrn.org/users/
cheers
Ben