Brave notes Ami, thanks for posting. The lack of a visible process seems to confuse and frustrate many people. I've heard a few stories from people who came to the network seeking funding and left with a feeling of being ditched or ignored. Many who seek investments or grants see Omidyar Network as some sort of holy grail until they start to build a relationship with ON; once contact is made the story changes and wraps many of us in a promise that may or may not come to fruition. I watched this very visibly occur at an entrepreneur.com conference this week; the woman speaking on how to finance your new venture started to smile REAL BIG when she talked about Pierre Omidyar and the promise of this organization to do amazing things. Someone with more experience should speak to the culture of Omidyar Network; most of us here only interact with the external social network side and never get to see the people in the office who are making the investment and funding decisions.

Someone just sent me this by email:

"Ami, wow - Ive really got to respect your guts for that post. I have had exactly the same experience and know many others who have. Ive also received calls from total strangers who hear that I know how onet works and wanted to know what they did wrong to get treated so badly (of course I dont know how it works).

A personal note: I found more value in time invested in ONet than in seeking $$ through Omidyar Network. The true value here is not in the capital, although that's a great gift for the groups that distribute those funds to people. The gift of this space seems to be a very deep sense of comraderie and partnership in work that extends beyond borders, beyond even our lack of resources to realize these dreams. Omidyar Network attracts dreamers and then takes them on a journey....sometimes that journey seems pretty twisted but it's still a very valuable trip. At the end of the ride you find you've been leading yourself all along!

Just as one human talking with another, I've found tons more value in the conversations here than in any gifts that come from those threads. I've forged friendships and partnerships that have helped our work to grow tremendously. There are a handful of Omidyar Network staff that I consider to be friends and fellow travelers on this journey and I'm very grateful for the people I've met through these encounters. These growing networks of change speak more about the quality of people who come here than any ON culture or tone set; I think we have tremendous power to gracefully encourage positive change in the organizations around us.

Amy, this is an important conversation you raise; I have also had these conversations with disappointed investment seekers.

At the same time, when I have discussed issues related to citizen engagement and democracy building with ON investment staff, the boundaries and priorities have been very clear and I have not felt led on. In fact, I have appreciated being able to move on and the support of ON investment staff in helping to connect me with other potential partners has been encouraging.

I am not sure where the disconnect lies, but it is important to sort out on both ends. I suspect we are all working with the same intent. Helping us conserve energy, resources and amity is essential. Your point about a clear process to get to a "Yes" and "No" statement in a reasonable amount of time is key.

It is also probably worth emphasizing that O.net and the ON investment division are two pretty different ... arenas? I hope Action Without Borders will find ways to collaborate here.

Yes, I agree that it's important to distinguish between Omidyar.net (this community) and Omidyar as a funding/investing partner. It is the latter that has disappointed many people.

Now that I've blurted this out, I might as well say it all. Over the last couple of years, at almost any conference or meeting I have been to, when people are talking in a group and Omidyar comes up, people invariably groan and roll their eyes, with the subtext, and the text, being: "You also got screwed over?"

Most of these people understand that funders will often reject their ideas, and it's of course their right to do so. The complaint is about the way ON does this, the raising of hopes and illusions, the leading on, the lack of empathy for people out there waiting to know if it's a Yes or a No. And it would be great if this could change.

Thanks,

Ami

Ami, I also appreciate the candidness of your post and have seen and heard others share your frustration elsewhere. 5 points to this thread from me based on your courage alone. In my career personally I've been on the NPO side, the founder/startup side, and the angel/VC side.

Here is one take on it, and I suspect it plays a small role. Most NPO's apply to and work with foundations, most companies pitch to and work with angels and VC's. The foundation world as I understand it is more the relationship most NPO's expect. Good positive foundation meetings often lead toward some type of real funding commitment and funding event. But in the angel/VC world...they hate to say "no". The answers tend towards loads of "maybes" and the occasional "yes". Many meetings tend to lead towards many meetings until often times nothing happens as other things come into focus yet the "no" never really happens.

Now this is just my outside take on it, and I personally support very much what your orgs do and would love to see many of your team active within this community. That being said, I understand there may be systemic problems that need to be addressed within ON prior to that really occurring. As an aside, I also think ON is still in the scale up/beta mode as an org and figuring out how to best apply its resources and determine what works towards achieving their ultimate goals and outcomes.

Ami Dar said:

I can't keep quiet any longer

Ami,

I think that's great -- and I look forward to reading more!

Please note, however, as noted by Mark and Evonne above, that ON is entirely different than o.net -- and therefore I think this thread is not directed to the right "audience".

Besides, I think posting in community general is usually a really bad idea (because of spam issues).

Ami, I echo your sentiments. I have heard third-person comments about Omidyar that have been more severe than you mention. Few people know the difference between the Network with a capital N and the .net version.

I have the greatest respect for what Pam and Pierre are trying to do, and have been following their work for quite some time http://www.munnecke.com/blog/archives/2002_10.html#000035. I applaud their openness and willingness to participate in and host this forum. I hope that all concerned understand that these comments are directed to the organization, and not the individuals.

In all of my dealings with them, Pam and Pierre have been impeccably polite and respectful of others. Creating an organization that must necessarily say "no" far more often than "yes" to a very large number of people is no small challenge. Working in that organization I would expect could be even more challenging.

Nevertheless, the qualities that the Omidyars personally exhibit and seek to inculcate don't seem to be propagating through their organization through to the public. Frankly, the opposite seems to be happening. It pains me to see their name being dragged down like this, for their sake and the sake of their children who will inherit this situation. Perhaps this is another lesson in roads paved with good intentions, but if my name were being treated like this, I would take some pretty severe corrective action.

One suggestion would be to dissociate the online group (omidyar.net) from the investing and grant-making organization (Omidyar Network) by giving it a separate name. The free-wheeling and open nature of omidyar.net I suspect is giving many people the impression that this group somehow shapes Omidyar Network policy. I am not sure of the exact status of the event coming up in Uganda next month, for example, but I have had outsiders refer to this as if it were an officially sponsored Omidyar event.

I have a major workshop at my home this weekend. It seems I want to save the world but my wife wants me to wash the dishes, so I have to run now. I'll be thinking about this over the weekend and post more later.

I look forward to seeing what Omidyar 3.0 looks like.

interesting link nmw pos 5

insightful link nmw pos 5

One suggestion would be to dissociate the online group (omidyar.net) from the investing and grant-making organization (Omidyar Network) by giving it a separate name.

I agree with you, Tom. While we all know the history of omidyar.net -- that it was a platform for communication that worked great for Omidyar Network staff, and they recognized that others would be able to put this tool to beneficial use as well -- that's the beginning of things. The connection to Omidyar Network is primarily through origin, not through present tense. The old mantra about "no unsolicited proposal, but hang around here and we'll see what bubbles up," isn't a realistic option for companies or organizations seeking significant capital -- $10,000 - $20,000 community favorite awards are very generous, and have really helped out people like Mark, Lars, John, Evonne, Christina, et al. But that's certainly not the level of investment that Omidyar Network makes into "real" businesses and nonprofits.

So, I'm all for a new name. The only problem, of course, is what that name would be. Any chance you'd give up the Giving Space name, Tom? :)

Ami, kudos to you for starting this difficult conversation. I appreciate hearing the perspective of social enterprise/nonprofit leaders who have been in discussions with Omidyar Network -- and I'm a great fan of idealist!

And I hope that out of this conversation we can do more than just express frustration, but resolve some issues and at the end of the day help both parties -- funder and funding-seekers -- better communicate and more effectively work together.

"Please be aware that Omidyar Network does not accept unsolicited business plans, proposals or individual requests. Any materials marked proprietary or confidential will be deleted or discarded. We encourage you instead to participate on omidyar.net." -- from http://www.omidyar.net/corp/contact.html

This language may be problematic.

But I am gathering that beyond the ambiguity of the "shingle" and the identity issues around the LLC vs. O/Net, there is some basic civility questions regarding staff. Or perhaps it is a question of a lack of clarity around the process of funding, a lack that could easily enough be addressed through refinement of the deliberative process and/or language used in communication.

What ever the case, it is brave of Ami to post here, and it would be brave and welcome for staff to respond, not to defend current practices, but to seek a deeper understanding of this perceptual schism, and to explore ways to transform it.

I think the schism is desired, isn't it?

ps: i.e. in the non-judgmental sense (simply "split")

see http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=schism

I mean the perceptual schism between Omidyar LLC and its community of potential collaborators and fundees and the schism between its promise and intention and what people seem be perceiving it to be.

I don't think there is a desire for the LLC on anyone's part to have a negative reputation amongst "serious and deserving people."

Mark Grimes said:

... I also think ON is still in the scale up/beta mode as an org and figuring out how to best apply its resources and determine what works towards achieving their ultimate goals and outcomes.

I absolutely agree with Mark on this, and I'll go even further, I think that the entire genre (I hope that's the proper word to use) is in a development/beta stage.

Things are being turned over, poked and prodded in ever which way, and added to this is an almost overwhelming tidewave of instant feedback, which takes time to wade through and figure out.

Omidyar may have a ton of money behind it, but even successful IPOs don't bring wisdom in along with the cash. Wisdom takes time to gather. And if Omidyar makes a few mistakes while taking the slow path, then, frustrating as it might be to be the one who suffers from these mistakes, if the end result is a great product, then your sacrifice would have been worth it.

cj

Ami,

Thanks for your candor in sharing how you feel here on omidyar.net.

At Omidyar Network, we try to be as straight forward and fair as possible with our potential investees.

Yes, our response times to incoming calls and emails can and should be faster, and we're working to do better.

Mark,

Just to clarify: I think that experimentation is great, and the more the better. What is not great is to lead people on and then leave them hanging. THAT is the complaint that so many of us have.

Even more specifically, there are some code words and code behaviors that everyone in the nonprofit and funding world uses, but the sense is that people at the LLC are often not careful enough with these words, and seem to not appreciate their impact on those who hear them. And by using words like "this is a sure thing" or "don't worry" or "you are a perfect fit" and then telling people again and again to just wait a couple more months, and in the end, when they ask what is going on, suddenly dropping them without an answer or an explanation, and never returning a phone call or an email, that is NOT experimentation. That is simply not the right thing to do, and it is THOSE stories that you hear again and again.

I hope this is clearer :-)

Ami

At the end of the day Ami, when that happens that is bad manners on either side of the tracks. And I am sorry that has happened, and equally as sorry those are the stories going around.

Well, at least Idealist got an answer today. To be completely transparent, after waiting for many months for a Yes or a No from ON, or for any word at all, my posting here elicited a No, which I received by email a couple of hours ago. A "yes" would have been better, of course, but a "No" is so much better than not knowing at all. Thanks so much to all of you for your support today!

Ami

Good luck in the rest of your funding searches Ami; I hope you continue to find lots of support for Idealist.

This is a perfect example of what we call a "venting conversation." I don't see "deep disappointment with Omidyar bubbling up everywhere." When we are upset because our expectations were not met, it may feel that way, but statistically and objectively, probably only a very small percentage of people are disappointed. Most people I know are very pleased with the Omidyar.net community.

We don't know the specifics of the situation that Ami Dar is referring to, so I just wish to comment in general and hope it will be helpful to put this thread into perspective.

On the positive side, if everything that happens to us is a blessing (which is what I believe), what are the lessons we can take away from this conversation for the participants of the Omidyar.net?

These are the first thoughts that come to mind, I may add more later:

It is better to take full responsibility for our own expectations and intentions. Often when we are upset and disappointed, we are not aware that we have unconsciously made an interpretation of the facts, and we are disappointed that the specific interpretation, not the facts itself, has caused our upset. If we are not aware, it is very tempting to project our hostility to others and blame them for our own interpretation of certain words or behavior.

For example, I had no expectation that Omidyar.net has anything to do with their funding LLC. The Omidyar.net website made it clear that they reserve the right to decide how to invest their own money. They are providing this free benefit called Omidyar.net in the hope that it will be helpful to the users.

And from my experience, Omidyar.net has been extremely helpful in connecting me with fabulous professionals and people who care and want to do something to contribute to the world. I found the feedback from members of Omidyar.net to be very stimulating and inspiring. Members' feedback have helped me to clarify certain areas and articulate or expand on other areas.

I understand that optimistic, sensitive and caring people think in terms of possibilities, therefore they are NOT misleading a person when they do not give a person a firm NO. As a social entrepreneur or nonprofit manager, it is our responsibility to assess how much risk our cash flow position permit us to take.

If something is taking longer than we expect for many reasons, it does not mean the other side is at fault. It means they are helping us to learn to make better risk assessments in the future. We can be much more realistic about what it will take, how long it may take, and can we live with the worst case scenario of rejection.

Here is a real historic example of taking responsibility for our own interpretation of other people's words or behavior. Americans were very upset with some Chinese in China when China first opened up because they expected an explicit yes or no in what they thought was a "reasonable" period of time. This is understandable because they may be paying $500 a day at the luxury hotel and they had to report the results of their trip to their Executive Committee.

However, there were many reasons some of the Chinese did not give an explicit or firm yes or no. These included (1) They did not know enough of what the proposal was about and they didn't have the time that was needed to translate and study the proposal. (2) They were just listening and being courteous, and had no idea the other side would interpret their "simply courteous listening" behavior as agreement or approval or even encouragement. (3) They did not have the authority to give you an explicit yes or no, and things sometimes change fast in certain circumstances. (4) Their experience with patient Japanese business people who thought in terms of 300 year business plans, makes it very difficult for them to understand American's circumstances and needs. They have not been to America. Some of them only earned US$30.00 a month so their reality is very different in terms of time frame and costs.

Therefore both sides did not know that they did not know where the other side was coming from, what assumptions were made by the other side, what each side expected but did not make explicit because each side made assumption that it was "common sense," what each side thought was "reasonable," was at odds, and "the way to operate" were different due to many reasons including culture, personality preferences, styles of communication, etc.

Of course, after the early American businessmen came back from China, they vented a lot among themselves at the bar and at home. It was a big learning experience. Now American businessmen are much more realistic of what to expect, what not to expect, how much time it will take, what the risks are, how to interpret silence and other comments, etc.

These are some of the lessons that come from experience. The entrepreneurs who had more courage, self-awareness, honesty with themselves, ability to forgive, and other personal qualities were better able to learn and benefit from the lessons. They became more successful in the future.

Therefore, probably any disappointment had very little to do with Pierre and Pam Omidyar, and had everything to do with who we are, what our expectations are, whether or not we are able to be unconditionally loving and joyful, and relatively unattached to the outcome, how much stress we are experiencing in our life currently, how the economy is affecting our outlook, etc.

I do appreciate Ami Dar for providing this opportunity to be reminded of our personal power to choose how we perceive a particular situation or outcome and to become more aware. Also the responses by Mark Grimes and others have been very educational and informative. We can learn a lot from each other in Omidyar!

Again, my associates and I wish to thank Pierre and Pam Omidyar very much for making Omidyar.net possible and we thank all the members for playing and participating in this unique community!

• for clarification, also see post of Feb. 6, 2007 19:50:46 pst

David Geilhufe said: ~Diane T.~ said: This is a perfect example of what we call a "venting conversation." I don't see "deep disappointment with Omidyar bubbling up everywhere."

Diane, I think the deep disappointment in Omidyar (both LLC/O.net) is visible in the reputation of the organization in the NPO sector and the exodus of amazing people from O.net. There are a lot of tremendous people in 18K registered users. But most of them have moved on to other venues. I still have the greatest hopes for both O.net and Omidyar LLC. I return to O.net every few months and recent activity is looking like things are ramping back up. The folks are amazing. But far from this just being venting, the discussion outlines that they have some serious structural issues to resolve.

Diane's Reply to David's comments above:

Thanks for the opportunity to clarify what I mean by a “venting conversation.” I would like to quote the following to share where I am coming from and what I mean:

"Conversations for venting with our personal buddies are emotionally healing because it is a way to release our negative feelings and disappointments. We take turns venting with our ABC buddies and we follow certain previously agreed upon guidelines. The need for it stems from the fact that we care deeply about someone or something. If we did not care, we would probably not be upset; we would just say to ourselves, “Who cares?” “So what?” “Why bother”?

Also the person who needs to vent probably sees possible improvements others may not see, and are experiencing difficulty in communicating it or the person does not feel he has been heard. So instead of perceiving the person negatively, we can perceive that person as calling for help.

Just what kind of “help” is the person unconsciously calling for? Perhaps help in the form of patient listening so he can vent his feelings and talk with someone or email back and forth until he feels he has been heard or feels complete.

After the venting conversations are completed, then and sometimes only then, is the person ready for coaching to re-structure the form of his communications from what appeared like complaints or gripes into a format of making specific requests for certain changes and giving good reasons for those requests.

It is more effective to put ourselves in the shoes of the other side when we give reasons for them to change. We make our requests clearly in a polite manner and make our best case. Then we try to be understanding of the other side's situation. We are humble enough to realize perhaps we do not know everything about their situation or their limitations at the moment, or their difficulties.

If we have done our best, we have satisfied our conscience. Often it is best to leave the rest to Higher Power. We can choose to have faith that we will get what we requested or something better in time. We live life forward but often we will understand it only looking backwards from the future.

Copyright 2006-7 by Award International Inc. Permission granted with acknowledgements. Awardassociates@gmail.com

Hi Diane,

Thanks for the comments. I tried to make it as clear as possible in my postings that I was talking about the LLC and not about O.net., which I think is great. Also, as I said at the beginning, I would have never posted this if this had been simply my own experience. Venting and complaining are not my thing.

I started this conversation because I got tired of seeing people I respect, all across the nonprofit sector, treated more poorly by the LCC than by any funder out there. Unfortunately, and for obvious reasons, most of these people don't want to speak publicly, but the complaints in private are overwhelming. And the pain that these people express is linked directly to the sense of how much potential there is here to do good in the world. Again, everyone presumes that intentions are good all around. People just want to be treated fairly and professionally.

Thanks,

Ami

Even though you may have received disappointing news about ON funding, I hope you'll get to know what's going on here at O.net and explore ways to collaborate. I have a lot of respect for Idealist!

me too!

:) nmw

Is there a way that the O/Net system, (or a version of the system tailored for Idealist) could help strengthen the efforts of Idealist to connect people together?

How could O/Net participants participate in the emerging networks Idealist wants to build?

Is there a way that the LLC could in some measured way honor and collaborate with Idealist on this new endeavor?