[Editor's note: The following first appeared in the June 2011 issue of NTEN:Change. Read the complete issue of NTEN's new quarterly journal for nonprofit leaders by subscribing to the journal for free!]

By Duane Raymond, FairSay

Derogative terms for digital activism like clicktivism and slacktivism have been rapidly adopted over the last year by a growing range of critics.

Ironically, months after their criticism, a wide range of digital tools played a small part in the 'Arab Spring' protests. So which is it: ineffective tool or tools that can topple governments? The reality is neither.

Digital activism has never been about the tools, just as 20th century activism was never about phones, radio or television

Digital activism has never been about the tools, just as 20th century activism was never about the tools of phones, radio or television, and pre-20th century activism was never about the printing press or the telegraph. Yet, critics seem unduly preoccupied with tools and/or the use of metrics like open and click rates and contrast that with proven skills of movement building and civil disobedience. The real opportunities of campaigning in a digital age are that we can be more dynamic and intelligent with our campaigning.

Digital activism has, for many, meant simply mirroring direct marketing and mass-mobilization methods. Campaigners are right to learn from testing, measuring and message appeals from direct marketing, and the use of petitions, pledges and letters from centuries of campaigning practice. But they often let the tools define what is possible rather than make possible what is necessary. It is time to go beyond the debate about whether digital activism works and start the debate about what we need to achieve, and then whether and how digital opportunities can be leveraged for those ends.

Managers need to make sure the right questions are being asked. If you ask for your open and click rates you'll get them. But if you ask for a campaign that achieves goals based on a sound theory of change, then you can get that too.

To do this, the right questions first need to be asked for each campaign or action:

1. What are you trying to achieve?
2. What is the theory of change?
3. How is the decision maker influenced and when?
4. Who do we need to mobilize?
5. What means do you need to achieve this?
6. How do you know if your plan is working?
7. What will it cost to achieve this?

If emails or Facebook isn't a natural answer to the 'means to achieve the goal' then that is fine. If the answer requires something that doesn't exist yet, then consider building it.

Managers need to make sure the right questions are being asked. If you ask for a Facebook page you will get one. If you ask for your open and click rates you will get them. But if you ask for a campaign that achieves tangible goals based on a sound theory of change, then you can get that too.

Watch the 2011 Activism vs. Slactivism debate from the event earlier this year at the eCampaign Forum.

(Note: You can read the entire June Issue of NTEN:Changeonline for free.)

We want to hear your feedback on this article:  what are the right questions that nonprofit leaders should be asking to get beyond the slacktivism debate?

Please leave your suggestions, stories, and questions in the comments below!