BOMM Subscriber Survey
DISCLAIMERS: About a third of the subscribers responded. This is a good response rate, but, all the same, less than a majority were represented. Additionally, not everyone filled in all the answers, so the representation is lowered even further below the 32% especially the list questions.

1. Age: 15-25 1% 26-35 39% 36-45 36% 46-55 23% 56-65 1%

2. From what mission mobilization agencies do you receive periodicals? Top 5 Mobilization periodicals:
USCWM/Mission Frontiers--at least 80%
Caleb Project--at least 42%
EMQ--at least 38%
Pulse--at least 32%
ACMC--at least 30%
I'll plan to read these and encourage everyone else to read them, and will not post stuff from them on a regular basis.

3. From what church denominations do you receive periodicals? 30% of respondants responded "NONE", so perhaps we have a high percentage of non-denominationaly-oriented subscribers. 24 Denominations were mentioned, and the distribution among the denominations was pretty even.

4. From what missionary sending agencies do you receive periodicals? 67 agencies were mentioned in a pretty even distribution. The top ones mentioned:
Wycliffe, OM--about 20%
YWAM, OMF, WEC, Frontiers, SIM, TEAM--about 10%

5. What other Christian magazines/newsletters do you subscribe to? Almost a fifth of respondants said that they didn't subscribe to any non-missions-oriented magazines, but among other respondants 34 periodicals were mentioned. Top 4 were:
Christianity Today (CT)--at least 20%
Leadership--at least 10%
Discipleship (DJ)--at least 10%
Charisma--at least 10%
6. What email conferences are you on? 36 Conferences were mentioned. Top 5 were:
Brigada Today--at least 75%
Monday Morning Reality Check--at least 60%
Brigada-Peoples--at least 30%
FridayFax and Advance--at least 25%
Next highest had less than 5%
Should we be somehow interacting more with MMRC?

7. How long have you been subscribed to brigada-orgs-missionmob'ers? Just over half had been subscribed for a year or more.

8. To what extent do you read the following content of B-O-MM? Always would be 100, Usually=67, Seldom=33, Never=0
Question & Answer 77
Testimony 73
Resources 84
Newsbrief 78
Personnel Needs 66
New Member Intros 65
People were more polarized in liking or disliking the newsbriefs--I think this reflects the differences in felt needs between professional and volunteer mobilizers. Testimonies were also pretty polarized, although I think that probably represents more a difference in personality than in profession. Since Personnel Needs and New Member Intros rated low, I will discontinue them, but if any of you want get updates on New Members, contact me <NateWilson@XC.org>.

Since there are different categories of postings on B-O-MM, you can choose what you want to read without having to skim it first. For instance, mobilizers who already have plenty of world news can trash the Newsbriefs without even looking at them.

9. How often have you responded to articles in B-O-MM by obtaining a resource mentioned or by contacting another mission mobilizer? 93% of people who have been subscribing for over a month have used info from this conference to get resources or connect with another mobilizer on their own!

11. I sub-scribe to B-O-MM:
At least 33% said "To keep abreast of what's going on in mobilization"

At least 25% said "To know what other mobilizers are thinking" "To get contacts and network with mobilizers" "Because of the high quality of the conference"

At least 15% said "To get resources" "Because I'm a moblizer, and it seems the place to be" "To get the newsbriefs"

12. I think B-O-MM could be improved by: About a quarter of the respondants mentioned improvements. Most were concerned about postings being too frequent or too long. The other major category of complaints had to do with frequently- asked, elementary questions. Commercialization and lack of critical discussion were also mentioned twice.

13. In my opinion, B-O-MM:
Comes too frequently 28%
Does not come often enough 2%
4 messages a week are just about right 70%
14. I think B-O-MM postings are: too long 12%
too short 0%
o.k. 88%
15. I think that B-O-MM is:
not worth Nate investing 20 hours a week to prepare 4%
worth reading 72%
so good that I'd pay money for a subscription 24%
16. Have you noticed any imbalances in agencies represented, contries highlighted, people quoted, subjects covered, sources overlooked, etc? No 77% Yes 23%

Almost all of the "yes" resonses fell into 3 categories:
--Complaints that some people get published a little too frequently,
--Suggestions that more be published from non-western subscribers
--and Comments that it's heavy on 10/40 Window or Unreached.
I have purposefully steered things toward the unreached, so that will probably remain a "bias" of this conference, but the other two categories are great feedback! HOW do we get more people to submit stuff to the conference so that the subscribers who write frequently don't feel it necessary to comment on everything? How do we encourage 2/3 World subscribers to write more?

17. I think B-O-MM postings
Are too technical 0%
Are too elementary 3%
Neither insult my intelligence nor go over my head 97%
I'm trying to keep a balance between the more technical needs of professional mobilizers and the more introductory needs of new/ part-time mobilizers.

18. What new services which could be added to B-O-MM that might be helpful to you?
Suggestions related to decreasing the frequency and length of postings were as follows: Fewer postings per week. (I'm considering rotating the 4 main topics between three weekly postings) Make Executive summaries. (I've been doing something like this with my hard copy archives, but people have not been requesting them. Perhaps I could edit them down further and email them once a month?) Split the 4 weekly postings into 4 separate conferences. (I don't know about that.)

Suggestions related to the frequently-asked, elementary Q&A's:
Make FAQ's. (I'll plan to do that as soon as I can devise a format.)

A few people requested that there be more editoralizing on mission isues and more statistics. I don't think I want to move in that direction because such a high percentage of subscribers are on Monday Morning Reality check. Justin Long is doing a good job with this, and I recommend subscribing to MMRC if anyone is interested in statistics and editorials on issues.

A few people also suggested breaking the conference into 2 separate email conferences, one for church mission committee members, and the other for professional mobilizers. I'm not sure what to think about that. About 30% of our subscribers work in the context of a single local church, while the other 70% are on staff with a mission agency of some kind. I think it's good that we have representation from both camps interacting on one conference. Even though mission agencies and church leaders may have slightly different foci and felt needs, it can help both to stay sensitive to each other and working together.

The only other new thing that got more than one reccommendation was to develop a searchable database of resources...

EOF